Empowered lives. Strengthening Judicial Integrity to justice.pdf · Conduct, later called the...

Analysis of the national studies on the capacities of the judicial institutions to

address the needs/demands of persons with disabilities, minorities and women

Strengthening

Judicial Integritythrough Enhanced Access to Justice

http://europeandcis.undp.org

U N D P R E G I O N A L C E N T R E F O R E U R O P E A N D T H E C I S

Empowered lives.Resilient nations.

UNDP Regional CentreFor Europe and the CIS Grosslingova 35

811 09 Bratislava

Slovak Republic

Tel.: +421 2 5933 7111

Fax: +421 2 5933 7450


Lessons Learned Series: Rule of Law, Justice & Human Rights


Strengthening Judicial Integrity through Enhanced Access to Justice

Analysis of the national studies on the capacities of the judicial institutions to address the needs/demands of

persons with disabilities, minorities and women

S T R ENG TH EN I NG J UD I C I A L I N T EG R I T Y T H ROUGH E NHANC ED ACC E S S TO J U S T I C E

Acknowledgements:

Joanna Brooks, A.H. Monjurul Kabir, Gezim Kolgeci, Irina Letova, Aleksandar Olenik,Sevima Sali-Terzic, and Azat Zholdybayev

Lessons Learned Series: Rule of Law, Justice and Human RightsUNDP Regional Centre for Europe and the CIS

Copyright © 2013By the United Nations Development Programme

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval systemor transmitted, in all forms by any means, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwisewithout prior permission.

The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarilyrepresent those of the United Nations, including UNDP, or their Member States.

S T R E N G T H E N I N G J U D I C I A L I N T E G R I T Y T H R O U G H E N H A N C E D A C C E S S T O J U S T I C E

Dear Readers,

The integrity, independence and impartiality of the judiciary areessential to protecting human rights and fostering economic devel-opment. But is this enough to ensure social justice and an inclusivelegal state?

Unfortunately, for disadvantaged and vulnerable groups acrossEurope and the Commonwealth of Independent States, the lack ofaccess to justice is widespread.

And it is precisely the status of the judiciary that has proven to bea key weakness of many transition countries in the region, as confirmedby many evaluations of national judicial systems, processes, andcomponents.

A preliminary desk review in late 2011 revealed a lack of information on the capacity ofjudicial institutions to address the needs of specific groups, namely people with disabilities,minorities and women.

Most people associate judicial integrity with an accountability, transparency and integrityagenda. But without unrestricted access to justice, does judicial integrity really exist? Can itsurvive beyond glorious declarations or official pronouncements? If people do not have access tojudicial services, they will not be able to get redress, and, judge quality of justice. It is likely thatpublic confidence in the judicial system will suffer. The challenges for marginalised communitiesand vulnerable groups in accessing justice are even greater due to historic reasons, discrimination,economic deprivation, political marginalization.

The present analysis, based on a recent UNDP analysis of national studies carried out in Bosniaand Herzegovina, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan and Serbia during 2011 and 2012, explains thechallenging situation. It is fair to say that there are institutional capacity and knowledge gaps injudicial institutions to address the needs of specific segment of population i.e., women etc. andgroups i.e., minorities, persons with disabilities, etc. This is worrying as it erodes people’s confidencein the justice system, and, further limits both the access to, and, quality of justice. We musttherefore identify the key barriers faced by disadvantaged and vulnerable groups in protectingtheir rights and accessing legal protection mechanisms.

I hope this analytical study will shed light on the main barriers experienced by women,people with disabilities and minorities, and unlock solutions-both traditional and innovative.

November 2013A. H. Monjurul Kabir

Acting Practice Team Leader, Democratic GovernancePolicy Adviser, Rule of Law, Justice and Human Rights

UNDP Europe and Central Asia

Table of contents

1. Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.1. Background and Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.2. Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61.3. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61.4. Structure and Scope of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82.1. International Standards and Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82.2. Access to Justice for Minorities, Women and Persons with Disabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82.3. Overview of Country Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

3. Analysis of National Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113.1. Common Themes and Crosscutting Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

4. Findings and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284.1. Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284.2. Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

5. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

ANNEXESAnnex I: Snapshot of Country/territory Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Annex II: Professionals Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Annex III: Court Users Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51


1.1. Background and Context

Access to justice is a vital part of the UNDPmandate to reduce poverty and strengthendemocratic governance. Within the broad con-text of justice reform, UNDP’s specific nichelies in supporting justice and related systemsso that they work for those who are poor, dis-advantaged and marginalized.

Access to justice is more than improvingan individual’s access to courts or guaranteeinglegal representation.1Access to justice is definedas the ability of people to seek and obtain aremedy through formal or informal institutionsof justice for grievances in compliance withhuman rights standards.2 There is no access tojustice where citizens, especially marginalizedgroups, fear the system, and see it as alien;where the justice system is financially inacces-

sible; where individuals have no lawyers; wherethey do not have information or knowledgeof rights; or where there is a weak justicesystem. For UNDP, access to justice involvesnormative legal protection, legal awareness,legal aid and counsel, adjudication, enforce-ment, and civil society oversight.

The integrity, independence and impartialityof the judiciary are essential prerequisites forthe effective protection of human rights andeconomic development. Moreover, judicial in-dependence is a prerequisite to the rule oflaw and a fundamental guarantee of a fair trial.Ensuring equality of treatment to all beforethe courts is essential to the due performanceof judicial office.3

Within Europe and the Commonwealth ofIndependent States, UNDP’s regional pro-gramme for 2011-2014 is focused on promoting


Executive Summary1

5

1 United Nations Development Programme, “Access to Justice Practice Note” 2004.2 United Nations Development Programme, Programming for Justice: Access for All: A Practitioner’s Guide to a

Human Rights-Based Approach to Access to Justice, Bangkok, UNDP, 2005. 3 Equality is defined as per the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct. The Bangalore Principles of Judicial

Conduct were developed by the Judicial Integrity Group, an informal gathering of chief justices and seniorjustices as a Draft Code of Judicial Conduct in Bangalore, India, in February 2001. The Draft Code of JudicialConduct, later called the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, were elaborated and further developedthrough various rounds of international round table meetings involving the UN Commission on Human Rightsand the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice by judges from common and civil law countries.For further information please see http://www.unodc.org/pdf/crime/corruption/judicial_group/Bangalore_principles.pdf

4 http://www.giz.de/en/home.html5 Hereinafter referred to in the context of the UN Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999).6 In Bosnia and Herzegovina the definition of minorities was narrowed to include only Roma, as the most numerous

and disadvantaged minority group. 7 Validation Workshops were carried out in Bosnia and Herzegovina prior to the finalization of their national study

and in Kosovo and Kyrgyzstan after the finalization of their national study.

human rights and access to justice for socialinclusion and legal empowerment (PHASEproject). As part of this programme, UNDPBratislava Regional Centre (BRC) representativesparticipated in an international conference onjudicial integrity, which was held in Tbilisi,Georgia, in April 2011, and organized in part-nership with Deutsche Gesellschaft für Inter-nationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ).4 One of therecommendations arising out of the conferencewas that UNDP should follow up on the evalu-ation of national judicial systems, processesand its components. A preliminary desk reviewrevealed the lack of information on capacitiesof the judicial institutions to address the needsof some specific groups: persons with disabilities,minorities and women.

1.2. Objectives

The overall goal of this initiative is toenhance access to justice for three specificgroups: people with disabilities (PWD), minoritiesand women. The objective of this report is toprovide an analysis of the national studies thatwere carried out in five selected countries/ter-ritories, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kazakhstan,Kosovo,5 Kyrgyzstan and Serbia, to assess thecapacities of judicial institutions (courts) to ad-dress the needs of the target groups.6 Theanalysis will also identify possible entry pointsand niches for UNDP at the national level forthe provision of further support in this area,and to inform regional policy and programmingsupport.

1.3. Methodology

Although there were some differences inthe approach at the national level, the samebasic, multi-faceted methodology was applied.The selected countries had applied via a com-petitive process and met pre-defined criteria.Two questionnaires were designed for pro-fessionals and courts users respectively, whichsought to elicit opinions, perceptions and ex-periences on the efficiency of the justice sys-tem, and the quality of services, accessibilityand fairness of the justice system in eachcountry/territory. In addition, specific questionswere addressed to judges, prosecutors, lawyersand court staff regarding their training andawareness of procedures relating to the targetgroups, and additional questions were posedto the target groups on accessibility issuesrelating to their specific needs. In addition,some of the Country Offices (COs) organizeda validation workshop with the aim of dis-cussing and validating the findings and rec-ommendations from the national studies withthe research participants.7 In addition, com-prehensive desk research was undertakenboth at the national level and regionally, andadditional consultations were carried out asrequired. Overall, the methodology outlinedabove, with its mix of qualitative and quanti-tative data collection methods, helped todraw up a comprehensive picture of theaccess to justice situation in the selectedcountries/territories in respect of the targetgroups.

6

STR ENG TH EN I NG J UD I C I A L I N T EG R I T Y T H ROUGH E NHANC ED ACC E S S TO J U S T I C E

1.4. Structure and Scope of the Study

The report seeks to present an overview ofthe relevant access to justice framework withineach country/territory. It identifies the mainproblems and obstacles that women, PWDsand minorities face in protecting their rightsand in accessing legal protection mechanisms,and in particular through the courts. It seeksto compare professionals’ opinions with court

users’ experiences, with a view to identifyingany shortcomings and gaps between the per-ceptions of service providers, on the one hand,and the experiences of service users on theother. The findings and recommendations havebeen drawn up from the data obtained andcomments and suggestions made by stake-holders during the consultations, as well asfrom the comprehensive desk research under-taken.

7


8 These include the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Covenant onEconomic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Dis-crimination, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Conventionon the Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities.

9 Article 27 of the ICCPR reads: “In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, personsbelonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right in community with the other members of their group,to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, or to use their own language.”

10 Progress of the World’s Women 2011-2012 – In pursuit of justice, UN Women, 2011.11 Statement by a group of UN independent human rights experts to mark the International Day for the Elimination

of Racial Discrimination, Monday 21 March 2011.

2.1. International Standards andFramework

General UN human rights treaties provideimportant standards for the protection of therights of persons belonging to minorities, in-cluding women and persons with disabilities.The rights guaranteed in all UN human rightsconventions apply equally to all members ofminority groups, including women and PWDs.8

Article 27 of the International Covenant onCivil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is the mostwidely accepted legally binding provision onminorities and provides the basis and inspirationfor the subsequent UN Declaration on Minorities.9

Given the wide ratification of the ICCPR, everystate in the world has a legally binding obligationto protect minority rights based on its voluntarycommitments under international law.

2.2. Access to Justice for Minorities,Women and Persons with Disabilities

Although equality between women andmen is guaranteed in the constitutions of139 countries and territories throughout theworld, inadequate laws and loopholes inlegislative frameworks, poor enforcementand vast implementation gaps make theseguarantees hollow promises, having littleimpact on the day-to-day lives of minorities,women and PWDs.10 Justice is central to theefforts to help minorities, women and PWDsbecome equal partners in decision-makingand development, yet “no country is freefrom discrimination in the administration ofjustice”.11

Access to justice for minorities, womenand PWDs is specifically safeguarded in a

8


Introduction2

12 See for example, the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious andLinguistic Minorities 1992, Article 4.1. “States shall take measures where required to ensure that personsbelonging to minorities may exercise fully and effectively all their human rights and fundamental freedomswithout any discrimination and in full equality before the law.”; the Convention on the Protection and Promotionof the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities, Article 13 - Access to justice “1. States Parties shall ensureeffective access to justice for persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others, including through theprovision of procedural and age-appropriate accommodations, in order to facilitate their effective role as directand indirect participants, including as witnesses, in all legal proceedings, including at investigative and otherpreliminary stages. 2. In order to help to ensure effective access to justice for persons with disabilities, StatesParties shall promote appropriate training for those working in the field of administration of justice, includingpolice and prison staff.”; and the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against WomenArticle 15.1. “States Parties shall accord to women equality with men before the law”.

13 Marginalized minorities in development programming, UNDP, Democratic Governance Group, Bureau forDevelopment Programming, May 2010

14 Thomas Hammarberg, 18 October 2011, http://www.coe.int/t/commissioner/news/2011/111018tpiromania_en.asp 15 Interim report of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, 10 August 2011 A/66/289.

number of international conventions, standardsand recommendations, yet in reality, minorities,including women and PWDs, often lack accessto justice and equal protection of the law.12

This exclusion can be caused by various factors,including discrimination, poverty, low insti-tutional trust or confidence in the process,lack of capacity, language barriers, weak accessto information, or living in remote areas witha lack of judicial facilities. Some minoritiesmay also prefer to use traditional justicesystems to resolve disputes. Minorities aremore vulnerable to arbitrary arrests and areless likely to receive a fair trial due to discrim-ination, under-representation in legal services,higher levels of social exclusion and languagebarriers.13

According to the Council of Europe Com-missioner for Human Rights, Thomas Ham-marberg, in October 2011, persons with dis-abilities are often denied access to justice onan equal basis with others. “There is an at-mosphere of impunity surrounding abusescommitted against people with disabilities.”14

In October 2011, the UN Special Rapporteuron the independence of judges and lawyerscalled for the urgent need to integrate agender perspective into criminal justice systems,as a fundamental step towards allowing equal

access to justice for women and men. Womenare still largely underrepresented in judicialoffice and in the legal profession throughoutthe world, in particular in the highest-levelpositions; this undoubtedly reflects institu-tionalized gender discrimination within thejustice system.15

2.3. Overview of Country Profiles

While development challenges in Europeand the CIS vary widely, the region is unitedby some commonalities, for example, relativelyhigh human development levels (with mostcountries in the region being middle-incomecountries); and the post-Communist transition.Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Serbia,as successor states/territories of the formerYugoslavia share a common history and back-ground, which is reflected in the inheritanceof the same judicial system and a similar de-velopment path, with all countries/territoriesseeking accession to the European Union.Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan also share simi-larities, as former Soviet states.

All of the countries/territories participatingin the survey are parties to the internationalhuman rights agreements and instruments

9


16 These agreements and instruments include the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the European Conventionfor the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the International Covenant on Civil and PoliticalRights, the Council of Europe Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, the Convention ofthe Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms ofDiscrimination Against Women, the Convention of the Rights of the Child and the Convention against Tortureand Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

that protect the rights of the target groups.16

However, the application of these agreementsand instruments varies, for example in Kosovothe application applies to substantive rightsonly and not procedural rights, since Kosovois a member of neither the UN nor the Council

of Europe and is thus not in a position toratify them. Please see Annex I for a snapshotof each country/territory providing usefuldata and information relating to access tojustice.

10


Because it is not possible to draw directcomparisons between all countries/territories,what follows is an analysis, which picks outcommon themes and trends, using specificexamples and data to support them. Theanalysis has been shaped around the compo-nents contained in the questionnaires. It wasnot always possible to reach large audiencesand get representative survey results. However,that does not undermine the value of datagathered as the survey results are stronglysupported by the interpretation of primarysources, such as national and international leg-islative frameworks, other regulations includingrelevant strategies and action plans pertinentto the specific target groups, reports of inter-national and domestic institutions and organ-izations on particular issues of PWDs, minoritiesand women, compliance reports of nationalauthorities with their international, constitutionaland legislative obligations as well as recom-mendations of the relevant human rights mon-itoring bodies. Therefore, the interviews andsurvey results should be viewed as an illustrativesource of information and findings in relation

to the judicial institutions’ abilities to meet thespecific needs of the target groups.

3.1. Common Themes and Cross-Cut-ting Issues

3.1.1. Women

Throughout the region gender-based vio-lence is one of the most frequent issues facingwomen. In Kosovo, “convictions for domesticviolence are rare, due to the traditional, male-dominated society and the attitudes towardswomen, which contribute to the high level ofdomestic abuse and low number of reportedcases”.17 Professionals surveyed throughout theregion pointed out the lack of sufficient aware-ness and knowledge among judges, prosecutorsand police and among the general populationon what constitutes gender-based violence,as well as other issues such as sexual andwork-place harassment that disproportionatelyaffect women over men. In Kyrgyzstan, poormedia coverage of the problem of gender vi-


Analysis of National Studies 3

1117 Human Rights Report on Kosovo, published by USA Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labour:http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/eur/154432.htm

18 Nevertheless, the authorities of internal affairs of the Kyrgyz Republic since 2004 have issued 4,574 temporaryprotective orders. In 5 months during 2011 the authorities of internal affairs issued 383 temporary protectiveorders, 352 of them in relation to men, 31 to women. Some 216 people were brought before the authorities,including via Article 66-3 of the Code on administrative responsibility (spousal assault). Some 28 cases ofdomestic violence were registered.

olence and the general lack of information onthe preventative measures and assistance thatare available to women is also a problem. Thesurvey and desk research indicate that theseproblems are replicated throughout the region.For example, in Kyrgyzstan, no court protectiveorders were issued for persons who committedspousal assault between 2003 and 2010. Duringthe first quarter of 2011, only two were issued.This is in part due to the lack of legal knowledgeamong the population and also due to thelack of opportunity of women, in particular inrural areas, to report crimes due to the insuffi-cient development of communication and in-frastructure.18

Discrimination against women is commonthroughout the region and the most discrimi-nated against are women with disabilities, mi-nority women, single mothers, older womenand those living in rural areas. There is continuingdiscrimination against women in public life,including public companies and steering boards,as well as executive bodies in the economicsector. Stereotyped gender roles as a deter-mining factor in the choice of profession andemployment of women, and a growing trendof women educated and employed in theservices sector is observed throughout the re-gion. Furthermore, discriminatory recruitmentpractices are prevalent and there is a lack ofgender-sensitive measures to stimulate em-ployment for women. The results of the surveysillustrate this. For example, in Serbia, the surveyshowed that there is a weakness of informationamong institutions, mainly the police, socialworkers and health care services, which resultsin women’s rights not being sufficiently pro-tected. Protocols on cooperation betweenthese institutions either do not exist at thelocal level or they are inefficiently implemented.

In Kyrgyzstan, despite the recent progressin achieving gender equality, notably the adop-tion of a gender equality law and related Na-tional Action Plan, women still have problemsin accessing justice. According to the resultsof the national study, these problems are, forthe most part, connected with the influenceof traditions, customs and religion. For example,In Kyrgyzstan, bride kidnapping is a particularissue that women face, as is polygamy. Womenwho are second wives are exposed to exploita-tion as unpaid workers and are disadvantagedlegally because their marriages are not regis-tered. According to the national study, there isa lack of knowledge among the general pop-ulation regarding the issues surroundingpolygamy.

In Serbia, despite the existence of a clearoverall policy and legislative framework for pro-moting the rights of women and gender equality,including laws, regulations and a set of strategicdocuments, and despite gender equality mech-anisms being in place at national, provincialand local levels and the basic normative frame-work relevant for institutional regulation ofgender equality being established, in practice,women remain discriminated against particularlyin the labour market. There has been an increasein the number of reported cases of domesticviolence in Serbia and victims are usuallywomen. Administrative authorities often resortto gender-related stereotypes in their organi-zational structures and methods of work, andtreat domestic violence as a private matter,which leads to the inappropriate applicationof available statutory powers. At the same time,the European Commission’s Serbia 2010 ProgressReport states, “the rules on legal protection ofwomen during court proceedings are not suf-ficiently applied in practice”.

12


19 The US State Department’s Trafficking of Persons Report 2011 http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2011/index.htmrates Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan and Serbia as tier 2 countries; those that do not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and Bosnia and Herzegovina are rated as tier 1 countries.

20 See for example, the Situation of Women in Rural Areas in Republika Srpska, Republika Srpska Gender Center,Report 2009.

21 Situation of Women in Rural Areas in Republika Srpska, RS Gender Center, 2009, and the Action Plan for the Im-provement of the Situation of Women in Rural Areas in Republika Srpska until 2015, Republika Srpska Government,2010.

Trafficking is another issue which is commonthroughout the region, and which dispropor-tionately affects women.19 Within thecountries/territories of the Western Balkansthe trafficking of women is mostly for prosti-tution and in Kosovo also for begging, whilein Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan women are alsotrafficked for forced labour, most notably toChina. In Kyrgyzstan, it is estimated that ap-proximately 4,000 women are trafficked annually,due to loopholes in the legal framework andthe system of border controls. The complexeconomic situation and high level of unem-ployment are also contributing factors.

Women in rural areas in all the countries/ter-ritories studied are disproportionately moreexposed to poverty and a harder economicsituation due to their very limited sources ofincome. Women in rural areas are more often

marginalized and their role is often neglected.20

The quality of life in rural areas is generallypoor, and access to services and infrastructureis inadequate, in particular for women. Publictransportation, water supplies, electricity, in-formation and communication technologies,and other advantages of urban areas remain abig obstacle for the rural population, especiallywomen. Due to these and other obstacles,rural women have poor education that per-petuates their already hard and disadvantagedposition and further restricts their access tojustice.21

The charts show that a majority of profes-sionals in all countries perceive that it is neveror seldom more difficult for a woman to accessthe courts. In those countries where court userswere asked whether in their experience it wasmore difficult for women to access the courts,

13


70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Never

Seldom

Sometimes

Usually

Always

BiH

Kazakh

stan

Kyrgyz

stan

Serbia

Chart I: Professionals: In your experience it is harder for a woman to access the courts?

22 It should be noted that the results of the survey from Kazakhstan were amalgamated to included bothprofessional and court user responses. Furthermore, only 2.4 percent of the respondents were representing thetarget groups with an additional 4 percent of respondents being social workers. All other respondents werejustice professionals.

in Serbia 100 percent and in Bosnia and Herze-govina 50 percent of female respondents an-swered that it was sometimes or usually harder,to access the courts. In Kazakhstan and Kyr-gyzstan there is a big divide between those re-spondents who answered affirmatively andthose who answered negatively. It is probablethat these results correlate to the difference inopinion between the professional respondentsand courts users. Similar results were obtainedin all countries among both professionals andcourt users, when they were asked whether itwas more difficult for a woman to access legalservices in their country. Regarding judges’,lawyers’ and court staff’s respect for women, inSerbia most professionals were of the opinionthat women either never, or seldom, or some-times get less respect. On the other hand, all ofthe female court users were of the opinionthat women sometimes get less respect.

Similarly, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 40percent of professionals responded that it isnot harder for women to access the courts,yet the majority of female courts users (60 percent) think that women’s access to justice isharder compared to men. The majority of courtusers also think that women’s access to legaladvice is harder that men’s (75 percent) andthat they get less respect (82 percent). Incontrast to this, 46 percent of professionalsthink that the courts treat men and womenequally.

Conversely, in Kazakhstan, only 43 percentof professionals believe that the courts treatmen and women equally, whereas 62 percentof court users state that it is never harder for awoman to access the courts and 71 percentstate that, in their experience, women do notget less respect from judges, lawyers and courtstaff.22

14


80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Never

Seldom

Sometimes

Usually

Always

BiH Serbia

Chart II: Court users: In your opinion is it more difficult for a woman to access the courts?

23 However, these measures have yet to be accompanied by substantial changes in attitudes and understanding ofgender roles of women and men in society in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

24 2010 Human Rights Report on Kosovo, see: http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/eur/154432.htm, pp. 35-36.25 UNDP Kosovo Human Development Report 2010, http://www.kosovo.undp.org/repository/docs/

HDR_2010_English.pdf 26 Monday 17, October 2011, on the occasion of International day for professional opportunities for PWD organized

by the Kosovo Office on Good Governance and Gender Equality, and in cooperation with OSCE and UNDP. Seearticle in daily newspaper Kosova Sot, Tuesday, 18 October 2011, pg. 8, quote of a UNDP official.

3.1.2. Persons with Disabilities

Throughout the region, the countries/ter-ritories participating in the study all have con-stitutions that prohibit discrimination againstpersons with disabilities. However, the positionin Kosovo, which is reflected among the othercountries, is that “the government did not ef-fectively implement laws and programmes toprovide persons with disabilities with accessto buildings, information, and communications,and the situation for persons with disabilitiesremains difficult”.24 Similarly, the 2010 UNDPKosovo Human Development Report, “SocialInclusion”,25 portrays this category “as the mostdiscriminated in Kosovo society, particularlythose that live in rural areas”.26 In Serbia, despitethe existence of a legal framework to protectthem, PWDs are still faced with discriminationand marginalization because regulations arenot implemented and there are omissions inother laws. Again, this position is reflected in

the other participating countries in the region.Only 23 disability-based discrimination caseswere initiated between 1 January 2010 and 1January 2012, following the adoption of theLaw on the Prohibition of Discrimination inSerbia. This illustrates that the law is not ade-quately in use, neither is it implemented inpractice to the extent expected, and in additionjudges are not sufficiently familiar with someof the innovations that the law introduced,such as the shifted burden of proof, as prescribedby the EU Directive 78/2000/EC.

In terms of the percentage of the populationwho have disabilities, no precise data has beencollected and estimates vary – in Bosnia andHerzegovina, Kosovo and Serbia it is estimatedthat approximately 10 percent of the populationhave disabilities, whereas in Kazakhstan andKyrgyzstan it is estimated that only 2.5 percent of the population have disabilities. This islikely to be due to discrepancies in data col-lection methods and definitions of disabilities.

15


Best Practice Example: Gender EqualityOver the past 10 years Bosnia and Herzegovina has developed a comprehensive legal frameworkand established a framework of government institutions for gender equality. This includes a Lawof Gender Equality, an Anti-Discrimination Law, a specific Law on Protection against DomesticViolence, which provides a comprehensive package of protective measures, the Gender ActionPlan 2006-2011, and the Resolution on Combating Domestic Violence, which expresses “zerotolerance”. Bosnia and Herzegovina has developed an impressive framework of institutionalgender mainstreaming mechanisms including the Gender Equality Agency and Gender Centreswith the aim of mainstreaming gender in all areas of public and private life. These genderinstitutions produce reports on, and monitor the implementation of, CEDAW, develop genderequality strategies, action plans, conduct training courses for civil servants and provide commentson laws and regulations in terms of their compatibility with the Law on Gender Equality.23

27 Disability is a strong determining factor of poverty; even if other characteristics such as education level, age,gender and place of residence are the same, it is more likely that persons with disabilities would be poor. PolicyStudy, note 9., pp. 28-29.

28 HANDIKOS – association of PWDs in Kosovo, supported by the EC Liaison Office has conducted a survey on theadaptability of public buildings for PWDs in Kosovo “A Suitable Environment – a society for all, 2010”. The surveyaddresses the concerns on accessibility and furthermore it provides clear technical guidance and instructions forthe adaptation of buildings for the needs of these groups. See: http://www.handi-kos.org/en.

29 Mr Suvad Zahirović, President of the Executive Board of Lotos, an NGO representing rights of PWD, and MrDragan M. Popović, UNDP, International Transitional Justice Specialist (11 November 2011).

Throughout the region, the study high-lighted that persons with disabilities face nu-merous problems, including access to healthcare and related costs; limited access to edu-cation (due to which their level of literacy islower than the average citizen); a lack of adap-tation of the higher education system to theneeds of PWDs, and a higher degree of povertyand the distribution of poverty compared toother citizens27 (see Chart III below).

One of the most serious obstacles is thehigh level of illiteracy and low education, whichis a result of general social exclusion, a lack ofinclusive education programmes, inadequate

legislation and awareness and a lack of adequatephysical access to the majority of public insti-tutions, including courts. In a recent study inKosovo, none of the court buildings werefound to have full access for PWDs, while 38percent had no access for PWDs at all.28 It canalso be said that there is a lack of governmentcooperation with NGOs representing PWD inthe formulation of strategies and policies relatedto their specific needs and implementation ofrights.29 This is true throughout the region.

In Serbia, PWD, in general, are excludedfrom public, cultural and political life and faceproblems regarding education, employment

16


45%

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

Access

to

healthc

are Access

to

cultur

al even

tsAccess

to

educat

ionInh

eritanc

eOth

er

Real es

tate/

land d

ispute

s

Chart III: What are the problems faced by PWDs in the region? (Professionals and court users)

30 It also adopted the Strategy for Improvement of the Position of PWDs and signed the UN Convention on theRights of PWDs.

31 The scope of this report does not permit a full examination of all minority issues in the region but seeks topresent some common themes and issues that were highlighted in the results of the studies and desk research.

32 Most notably in Kosovo.33 In particular in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo. 34 See for example, the 2010 Human Rights Report on Kosovo, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/eur/154432.htm

and the exercise of their rights. Even thoughSerbia was among the first countries in the re-gion to adopt a Law on Preventing Discrimi-nation against Persons with Disabilities, as earlyas 2006,30 citizens with disabilities are still facedwith discrimination. According to the survey,one area where the opinions of professionalsand courts users did not differ in their responseswas with regard to PWDs’ ability to accesscourts and lawyers or legal advice, where themajority of both were of the opinion thataccess is sometimes or usually harder for PWDs.All PWD court users in Serbia answered thatthey were sometimes treated with less respectas a result of their disability.

The justice system in Serbia is generallyaccessible in terms of court building locationsand accessibility of information. However, whenit comes to physical accessibility of the courtsand layout within the court buildings the situ-ation is qualified as very difficult. Even thoughdiscrimination on the basis of disability in thearea of access to public buildings and premisesis strictly prohibited by the Law on the Pre-vention of Discrimination against Persons withDisabilities, the majority of the court buildingsin Serbia and the region neither have appropriateentrances for PWDs nor layout within the courtbuildings to support PWDs.

In Kyrgyzstan, despite the ratification of in-ternational treaties and equality of rights for-malized in both the constitution and otherlaws, PWDs continue to face significant obstaclesand barriers in accessing justice. According tothe survey, reasons for this include distrust ofthe existing system, costs, lack of informationand knowledge, inaccessibility of courts andrelated buildings, transport, infrastructure of

towns and cities and the absence of interpreters.In Kazakhstan, the most common reasons forPWDs to access the courts, is in relation toaccess to work, access to medical care, accessto education and access to cultural events. Itwas noted, however, that despite the largenumber of legal problems, citizens, especiallythose with disabilities rarely go to court andeven if they do, they are not always sure of afair resolution of disputes.

3.1.3. Minorities31

Each of the countries/territories participatingin the study has a significant number of mi-norities – please see the table in Annex I forthe individual breakdowns. Within these states,institutional and societal discrimination persistagainst minority communities in the areas ofemployment, education, social services, lan-guage use, freedom of movement,32 the rightto return,33 and other basic rights. This dis-crimination also translates to minorities’ abilitiesto access the justice system. 34

Regarding the employment of national mi-norities in public service in Serbia, including inthe judiciary, the majority of public adminis-tration authorities and services do not applythe regulations, do not plan to take measuresto increase the number of minority employeesand do not keep records of the ethnic structureof employees. This situation is mirrored through-out the region in the countries/territoriesstudied.

The position of the Roma is particularlyvulnerable. Roma are considered to be thelargest national minority in Bosnia and Herze-govina and make up a sizeable minority in

17


35 Report, Thomas Hammarberg, Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Following his visit toBosnia and Herzegovina on 27-30 November 2010 at: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1766837&Site=CommDH&BackColorInternet=FEC65B&BackColorIntranet=FEC65B&BackColorLogged=FFC679

36 Namely, the laws on the protection of rights and freedoms of national minorities and on national councils ofnational minorities.

37 Problems occur in the exercise of the right to the official use of national minority languages in local self-governmentunits and public authorities. Different practices of local self-governments pertaining to the exercise of the right tothe official use of language and script puts them in an unequal position within the same legal system.

both Kosovo and Serbia. Precise numbers aredifficult to provide due to the lack of registrationand inclusion in other official statistics anddata, such as censuses. At the same time,within the sub-region of the Western Balkans,Roma are the most vulnerable national minorityand experience the worst situation in relationto the protection of their human rights. Aspointed out by the Council of Europe’s HighCommissioner for Human Rights during a visitto Bosnia and Herzegovina, the lack of reliabledata on the number of Roma continues topresent a significant obstacle for the develop-ment and implementation of targeted measuresto improve their situation.35 In particular, thelack of registration and identity documentsamong Roma continues to represent one of

the main obstacles for the enjoyment of theirsocial, economic and civil rights. The otherproblems that stem from this issue includelack of access of the vast majority of Roma tobasic health care services; any kind of socialwelfare; education; employment; housing; andaccess to courts and other protection mecha-nisms. Female Roma and/or those with dis-abilities often face double or even triple dis-crimination.

In Serbia, for example, the cultural autonomyof national minorities has been defined bythe constitution and specific laws.36 However,the exercise of particular rights of nationalminorities is impeded or prevented by thelack of by-laws, guidelines, rulebooks or otheracts, which the administrative authorities

18


40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

Real es

tate/

land d

ispute

s

Emplo

yment

Docum

entatio

n

issues Oth

er

Access

to

inform

ation

in mino

rity

langua

ge

Chart IV: What are the problems faced by minorities in the region?

38 Ombudsperson Annual Report for 2010.39 For example, Serbia has one of the largest displaced populations in Europe, including persons displaced from

Kosovo (IDPs) as well as persons who are still registered as refugees, mainly from Croatia but also from Bosnia andHerzegovina. A significant percentage of refugees have locally integrated as Serbian citizens and another largepercentage have returned to their country of origin or resettled in third countries. However, over time the large-scale return efforts have been reduced to minimal levels while the remaining refugees include many who havenot been able to achieve durable solutions either because of difficult personal circumstances (age, illness etc.), orintractable obstacles impeding sustainable return. Similar situations and issues apply in both Bosnia andHerzegovina and Kosovo.

should enact.37 Regarding employment of per-sons belonging to national minorities in publicservices, including the judiciary, the majorityof public administration authorities and publicservices do not apply the regulations, do notplan measures to increase the employmentof persons belonging to national minoritiesand do not keep records of the ethnic structureof employees, because the required adminis-trative procedures have not been developedyet, among other things.38 The professionalsparticipating in the survey in Serbia highlightedpersonal documentation issues, access to in-formation in minority languages and employ-ment as the three most prevalent issues facingminorities.

Throughout the Western Balkans, refugeesand IDPs also make up a significant minority.39

In both Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan there is asizeable Russian minority, while in Kyrgyzstanthere is also a large Uzbek minority. The resultsof the survey showed that access to informationin a minority language is one of the mainissues facing minorities in the region. Differingtypes of information and data support this.For example, respondents in Bosnia and Herze-govina and in Kyrgyzstan were asked whetherthe following sources of information wereavailable in minority languages – please seeChart V below for the results:

These results show that signs in courts, in-formation and forms in civil proceedings and

19


70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Yes

No

Don’t Know

Laws an

d

Regula

tions

Signs

in Cour

t

Inform

ation

and for

ms in

civil

procee

dings Info

rmatio

n

and for

ms in

crimina

l

procee

dings

Chart V: Are the following sources of information available in minority languages in yourcountry?

laws and regulations are more often not availablein minority languages. Interestingly, but notunsurprisingly, given the legal requirement inmost countries, information and forms in crim-inal proceedings are more readily available inminority languages. In Serbia, the survey foundthat problems occur in the exercise of theright to the official use of minority languagesin local self-government units, public authoritiesetc. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the majorityof the interviewed professionals confirmedthat there is no information available in minoritylanguages either on the Internet or in courtbuildings or any other public institution.

In all countries/territories in the region, inorder to ensure access to justice for thosewho do not speak the language of the pro-ceedings, interpreters should be freely availableand the minority party should be able tospeak in their mother tongue. This right issafeguarded in the constitutions of all coun-tries/territories participating in the survey andin other legislation such as criminal and civilprocedural codes and specific minority pro-tection legislation. However, when the re-spondents in the region were asked whetherthe state always provides an interpreter atevery stage of the proceedings, responses

among both court users and professionalswere mixed – see below.

The survey showed that in general, theright to an interpreter is more often providedfor that not. However, the legal arrangementsfor an interpreter in all countries/territoriesneeds further improvement. One of the majorproblems is the shortage of qualified andcertified interpreters, the search for which oftenleads to the prolongation of a case. Some re-spondents in Kazakhstan for example, high-lighted the necessity of establishing full-timeposts for interpreters in the apparatus of courtstaff. This is particularly important in the northand east of Kazakhstan where there are problemsassociated with a lack of professionals who arefluent in the national (Kazakh) language. Thesurvey in Kazakhstan also noted the difficultiesin preparing documents in the official language.

In Serbia, the survey showed that regardingthe abilities of minorities to access courts andlawyers/legal advice, the perception betweenprofessionals and minority court users differedin the sense that all the answers of minoritycourt users were divided between “seldom”and “sometimes” while professionals providedanswers more or less equally from “never” to“usually”. None of the professionals answered

20


70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Never

Rarely

Sometimes

Usually

Always

BiH

Kazakh

stan

Kyrgyz

stan

Serbia

Chart VI: Does the State always provide an interpreter at every stage of the proceedings?

40 The Kyrgyz Revolution of 2010 began in April 2010 with the ousting of Kyrgyz president Kurmanbek Bakiyev inthe capital Bishkek. It was followed by increased ethnic tension involving Kyrgyz people and Uzbeks in the southof the country, which escalated in June 2010. The violence ultimately led to the consolidation of a newparliamentary system in Kyrgyzstan.

that it is always harder for minorities to accesscourts and lawyers/legal advice. Regarding re-spect that minorities get from judges, lawyersand court staff, professionals were of more orless equal opinion that minorities, either never,seldom, sometimes or usually get less respect.However, none of the professionals was of theopinion that minorities are always treated withless respect. Conversely, all minority court userswere of the opinion that they are sometimesor usually treated with less respect.

In Kyrgyzstan the events of June 201040

have resulted in profound mistrust betweenrepresentatives of national minorities and thepolice and courts. Due to negative communi-cation with police and courts and/or anecdotal

and preconceived ideas, many representativesof national minorities in Kyrgyzstan are not in-clined to participate in the formal justice system.

3.1.4. Free Legal Aid

Among the countries/territories participatingin the study, the framework surrounding freelegal aid differs, but in all instances could beimproved. In Bosnia and Herzegovina andSerbia there are currently no free legal aid lawsbut both countries have draft laws which werethe subject of public consultations in November2011 and which are expected to be put up foradoption by the respective ministries of justicein 2012. In both countries, the issue regarding

21


Example of Best Practice: Minority RightsIn September 2009, the Serbian Assembly adopted the Law on National Councils of NationalMinorities. The law regulates the competencies and elections of the national minority councilsin line with international standards and represents the intention of the State to contribute tostrengthening the vibrant and thriving multi-ethnic society of Serbia. The Council of NationalMinorities coordinates the work of the 15 National Councils (Hungarian, Ruthenian, Romanian,Walachian, Croatian, Slovak, Bunjevci, Greek, Bulgarian, Ukrainian, Romani, Bosniak, Macedonian,Jewish and German Councils). The National Councils have competencies in four areas ofnational minority rights: culture, education, information and the official use of language andthe alphabet. Line ministries have the duty to consult with the council any time they arepreparing policies or regulations in these areas. The council has representatives of eachminority council who are elected by their constituencies for a term of four years. The council ispart of the Serbian Agency for Human and Minority Rights, chaired by the Prime Minister. Mu-nicipalities with one national minority that accounts for more than 5 percent of the municipalpopulation, or all national minorities collectively that account for more than 10 percent of themunicipal population form a Council for Inter-Ethnic Relations, to deal with the realization,protection, and improvement of ethnic equality in local communities. The Government ofSerbia has also established the Agency for Human and Minority Rights. Its responsibilitiesinclude: monitoring the harmonisation of local regulations with international standards forhuman and minority rights; reporting on the implementation of international agreementson human and minority rights; supporting the Council of National Minorities; and establishingconnections between national minorities and their countries of origin.

the providers of free legal aid, and whether toinclude NGOs as providers is still outstanding.In all countries/territories free legal aid continuesto be provided to a greater or lesser degree byNGOs, irrespective of the formal provisions.

In Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan there are nospecific free legal aid laws, although there isprovision for free legal aid in certain types ofcases and for certain categories of personswithin the respective criminal and civil procedurecodes. This right is also safeguarded in theconstitutions of both countries. However, ap-plication of this right is variable. For example,in Kyrgyzstan, PWDs are included in the list ofpersons having the right to receive free legalaid but in reality this right only translates tocriminal proceedings and no free legal aid isprovided by the State for civil or administrativecases. In Kazakhstan there is an ex officiomethod of providing free legal aid lawyers,meaning they are appointed from provincialbar associations and paid for from the Statebudget. However, there have been efforts toimprove the quality of legal assistance providedby lawyers in a targeted manner. Addressingthe quality of legal assistance requires strength-ening control mechanisms over the expenditureof budgetary funds, which requires the creationof a specific legal framework, that is, a lawgoverning the provision of free legal assistance.

In Kosovo, Regulation No. 2006/36, on LegalAid, guarantees provision of legal aid to thosewho would otherwise be denied effectiveaccess to justice because they lack sufficientresources. Legal aid facilities provide primaryand secondary legal aid. The draft law foreseesprovision of legal aid without direct or indirectdiscrimination against any person or personsbased on sex, gender, age, marital status, lan-guage, mental or physical disability, sexual ori-entation, political affiliation or conviction, ethnicorigin, nationality, religion or belief, race, social

origin, birth or any other status.41 However,based upon interviews with courts users, thesurvey noted that the existing legal aid mech-anisms are either considered ineffective, orthere is no information on their operation, par-ticularly in rural areas, or that they operatemainly in a language not understood by otherethnic communities.

Other problems concerning the provisionof free legal aid and assistance are also prevalentthroughout the region. For example, in Bosniaand Herzegovina most of the Roma in need tolegal assistance cannot access public legal aidoffices as they do not have legal identificationand cannot submit the necessary documentsin support of their request. PWDs usually haveproblems with physically accessing these offices.There is also a lack of sufficient awareness ofemployees in public legal aid offices on thespecial needs and demands of PWDs, minoritiesand women, which hampers not only accessto these services but also the effective protectionof rights.

3.1.5. Judicial and Public Administration

The availability of the judicial system andthe quality of justice it dispenses dependlargely on the coordinated work of judges andthe staff of the courts, their professional com-petence and compliance with ethical standardsof conduct and workplace discipline. In mostcountries in the region, there is a distinct lackof confidence in the judicial systems. For ex-ample, the UNDP Bosnia and Herzegovina Spe-cial Report: “Facing the Past and Access toJustice from a Public Perspective” revealed thatonly a negligible percentage of respondentsexpressed their “full” confidence in the judiciaryin Bosnia and Herzegovina. This symbolic con-fidence in the judiciary leads to a worryingconclusion that it is seriously damaged and

22


41 The draft Law on legal aid is being processed within the Parliament of Kosovo, and soon the regulation will bereplaced by the law, however, no major changes are expected as regards the field of operation.

indicates strong scepticism towards the judi-ciary.42 This situation is similarly reflected inSerbia, where a recent study commissionedby the World Bank found that only 13 percentof members of the general public who hadexperience with court proceedings expressedtrust in the judiciary.43 In Kyrgyzstan those in-terviewed as part of the survey stated that themost prevalent barrier in accessing justice wasdistrust of the existing system, while in Kosovothe European Commission’s “Progress Report2011” acknowledges the low level if confidencein the courts.44 Conversely, in Kazakhstan, 69percent of respondents found the justice systemto be usually or always competent, with 64percent of respondents rating the country’sjustice system as either good or excellent.45

Bosnia and Herzegovina is trying to addressthese issues, for example, by adopting a Careof Court Users Strategy aimed at assisting thecourts to meet the needs of ordinary citizensand building public trust and respect for thecourt system. The key task is to implement thestrategy throughout Bosnia and Herzegovinaand to help create public confidence in thecourt system.

In Kosovo the survey found that amongprofessionals it is viewed that the justice systemmakes great efforts to implement and enforceall rights with regard to vulnerable groups inan equal and fair manner, yet court users andrepresentatives of the target groups highlightthat the justice system is inefficient, that thejudges have a traditional (patriarchal) approach,with stereotyped attitudes towards vulnerablegroups, that there is a lack of institutional co-ordination, a lack of adequate training, cor-ruption, non-adherence to principles of equality

and fair treatment and a deficiency in imple-mentation and the full application of the law.

The majority of rights related to the basicprotection of PWDs, Roma and women are re-solved in administrative proceedings (for ex-ample, registration, decision making in relationto access to social welfare benefits for all threegroups, access to health care, unemploymentbenefits, etc.). However, the survey found thatthe public servants who are conducting theseadministrative proceedings often lack awarenessand training on the specific needs and rightsof PWDs, Roma and women due to whichthese three target groups are often deprivedof their basic rights, or if they do access thesebasic rights, the process is quite difficult andprolonged. There is also a need to improvethe work of social welfare centres, which arein general understaffed, underfinanced andlack adequate awareness of and informationon rights protection mechanisms, as well aslegal service providers. Problems in the func-tioning of the judicial systems, including alarge backlog of cases and extended trialperiods, do not contribute to the increase ofrequests for judicial protection against dis-crimination.

3.1.6. Judicial Training and Integrity

In Kazakhstan, the Strategy on Judicial Ed-ucation develops and implements educationalprogrammes for judges, plans to organize in-ternships for judges and regulates the operationof training centres and the Institute of Justiceat the Academy of Public Administration underthe President of Kazakhstan. The aim is to in-troduce compulsory in-service training for

23


42 UNDP Special Report: Facing the Past and Access to Justice from a Public Perspective, 2010, p. 33, available at:http://www.undp.ba/upload/publications/Facing%20the%20Past%20and%20Access%20to%20Justice.pdf.

43 Justice in Serbia: A multi-stakeholder Perspective, World Bank, 2011.44 Kosovo 2011 Progress Report, European Commission, Brussels 2011, http://ec.europa.eu/enlargemnet/pdf/key_doc-

uments/2011/package/ks_rapport_2011_en.pdf 45 The majority of respondents to the questionnaire in Kazakhstan were judicial professionals.

46 For more information on JPTCs, see www.fbih.cest.gov.ba and www.rs.cest.gov.ba 47 Interview with Mr Radoslav Marjanović, Deputy Director and Mr Almir Tabaković, Senior Adviser, FBiH JPTC 14

November 2011.48 The Kosovo Judicial Institute confirms the requirement for further advancing and familiarization of all judicial

personnel with the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, considering it as an important element to increaseawareness of and treatment of vulnerable groups while approaching the courts/prosecutors’ premises. “Trainingshave been conducted for the Law on Anti-Discrimination, the Law on Gender Equality, on Constitutionalprovisions concerning human rights instruments and international conventions, but unfortunately one of thatfactors that impedes proper implementation is the unwillingness of key stakeholders to cooperate”. Part of thetraining programmes for judges and judicial officers contain initial (basic) familiarization with the ethics rules,providing an explanation of the notion of equality, its role and importance in delivery of justice by judges.Interview/questionnaire with KJI Director, Mr Lavdim Krasniqi, 17 November 2011. Mr Krasniqi emphasized theneed to upgrade and focus on ethics training as envisaged in the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct and itscommentary, which according to him were not part of the KJI programme so far.

judges at least once every five years, to developdistance learning and to update the role ofmainstream and on-site classrooms and trainingcentres. However, the results of the surveyshow that of the judges interviewed, only 7percent had attended any training on genderissues and none had received any training onissues relating to PWDs or minorities. The scopeof the survey did not make it possible toevaluate how effective this training is.

In Kyrgyzstan, pre-service and in-servicetraining is provided by a Judicial Training Centreunder the authority of the Supreme Court. In-ter-related theoretical and practical trainingcourses, as well as placements aimed at helpingjudges to obtain judicial skills are included inthe comprehensive programme for pre-servicetraining. Despite this, very few lectures con-cerning the target groups are conducted andthose that are only indirectly touch upon theproblems of women, PWDs and minorities.The survey found that the majority of judgesin Kyrgyzstan do not possess knowledge of, orreceive training on, issues relating to women,PWDs and minorities.

Training for the judiciary in the WesternBalkans is provided by their respective JudicialTraining Centres. In Bosnia and Herzegovinafor example, professional training and educationis obligatory for all judges and prosecutors,and the High Judicial Council sets the minimumconditions that every judge and prosecutor

must fulfil annually in this regard.46 There are12 modules in the training programme, andjudges and prosecutors must participate infour of them annually in order to obtain a cer-tificate. There is a separate module on humanrights, including a seminar on the implemen-tation of the European Convention on HumanRights (ECHR; another seminar on “Segmentsin the protection of human rights and freedoms“,which includes, inter alia, the Law on Prohibitionof Discrimination; and a workshop on genderequality. The new 2011-2014 Mid-term JudicialTraining Centre (JTC) Strategy provides a shiftfrom general towards more specialised trainingand education of judges and prosecutors.47

However, when asked if they had undertakenany specific training on issues relating towomen, 85 percent of the professionals an-swered no. Similarly, 100 percent answeredthat they had not received any training onissues relating to minorities or PWDs. A similarsituation exists in Kosovo, and the low awarenesslevels among the judiciary regarding ethicalaspects and their incomplete understandingof the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conductwas relatively obvious in the survey.48

In Serbia, as a part of its programme ofpermanent training, the Judicial Academy pro-vides training on anti-trafficking cases, genderequality, and protection from discriminationas well as training on the institutional law ofthe EU, human rights and EU law. Approximately

24


49 The training courses were organized in the form of seminars and lectures three times per year with an averagenumber of 24 hours’ training per person. The subjects were gender equality, anti-trafficking and family violence.Activities during the training consisted of introducing the attendees to domestic and international regulationson the relevant subject followed by elaboration of specific provisions that refer to the conduct of the prosecutionand the court. Members of the judiciary that attended the training courses assessed them as useful for theirpractice.

50 On the matter of proper translation into Serbian language, during the interview (27 October 2011), the judge ofthe Constitutional Court of Kosovo emphasized that: “The translation of the laws into Serbian is extremely badand incomprehensible: it can only be understood by those who are literate in all three languages, English,Serbian and Albanian”. Additionally, an interesting point was given from the text of the Constitution of Kosovo,where the Constitutional Court in the Serbian version has been referred as a Court of High Instance, a non-existent mechanism. He emphasized, that these and similar examples create practical incapacity for Serbian/Bosnian/Gorani/Croat/ speaking communities to properly address and access the court services.

30 percent of the professionals (includingjudges, prosecutors and attorneys) who tookpart in the survey in Serbia attended specifictraining courses related to woman in the justicesystem.49 The same percentage was aware ofspecific court procedures that should be fol-lowed in cases involving issues related towomen. However, according to the experienceof all of them, these procedures were only“sometimes” applied in relevant cases, mostlydue to the lack of awareness of judges, prose-cutors and the woman involved. RegardingPWDs in the justice system, 18 percent of pro-fessionals in Serbia attended seminars relatedto PWDs. None of the professionals who par-ticipated in the survey attended any trainingrelated to minorities in the justice system, norwere any of them aware of any specific courtprocedure that should be followed in casesinvolving minorities.

3.1.7. Access to Information and PublicAwareness

Throughout the region, it can be said thatthere is not enough understanding of dis-crimination as a concept among the public,so individuals often do not even recognizecertain behaviours as discriminatory. Thegeneral public and PWDs, minorities andwomen in particular, are still not aware ofhow to protect themselves from discrimination,of the mechanisms available to them or of

public authorities’ obligations towards themin this respect. There is also a fear amongthose who are subjected to discrimination inemployment of possible negative reactionsor sanctions by the employer. Also, and mostimportantly, the research conducted for thepurpose of this study proves that the legalcommunity within the countries/territoriesstudied is generally not sufficiently educatedabout the application of international standardsrelated to non-discrimination and methodsto prove discrimination as stipulated by thelaws, and how to provide relief.

For example, in Kosovo the findings of thesurvey showed that awareness levels aboutthe availability of formal justice mechanismsare quite low among the vulnerable groups.Low awareness levels about the available serv-ices can be attributed to factors such as geo-graphical location in remote rural areas, insuf-ficient promotion, inadequate access to themedia, low literacy levels especially amongwomen, use of technical jargon in publisheddocumentation and lack of proper translationinto minority languages.50 Similarly, in Bosniaand Herzegovina, the majority of interviewedprofessionals agreed that the courts do nothave adequately accessible information specif-ically tailored to the needs and demands ofthe target groups.

Kazakhstan has a Republican Centre ofLegal Information of the Ministry of Justice,which includes a database of legislation. The

25


database is accessible from frequently visitedlocations, such as public service centres, infor-mation and reference stands operating in thecourts, computer classes at universities, researchlibraries, public reception offices of the governingparty and institutions of the committee of theprison system. The ministry is working on in-novative projects to ensure the free accessibilityof the database for all citizens.

3.1.8. Efficiency of Justice

Interestingly, the results of the survey showthat particular affiliation with one of the targetgroups is not seen by professionals as a particularreason for the length of the court proceedings.Similarly, court users seem to agree that theirbelonging to a target group had not influencedthe length of the proceedings.

26


Best Practice Example: E-justice In Kazakhstan, work is under way to launch an “e-justice” system, which is being implementedon a pilot basis in specialised district commercial courts. This is based on the best practiseexample of Turkey where a comprehensive system of e-justice has been implemented.Citizens can reach and examine their case information via the Internet and can be informedvia the website about their cases or hearing dates. They can submit their claims to courtusing their electronic signature and examine their files via the Internet. Lawyers can file a suit,submit any document to court and pay the case fees from their offices by use of theirelectronic signature via the Internet. They can litigate a claim or dispute to court and reviewtheir cases via electronics means and submit their petition online. The system was developedin order to ensure a fast, reliable, and efficient justice system. It not only connects judicialunits with each other but also with concerned institutions. In the trials, judges can accesscriminal records and birth certificate registrations online according to their authority. Allcases in Turkey’s courts can be accessed online by judges, prosecutors and lawyers. Landregistries and driver registers can be retrieved instantly at the beginning of trials.

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Never

Seldom

Sometimes

Usually

Always

BiH

Kazakh

stan

Kyrgyz

stan

Serbia

Chart VII: Professionals: In your experience would you say that cases involving women,PWDs and minorities usually take longer to resolve than those cases not involving thesegroups?

3.1.9. Infrastructure

Many of the court buildings in the regionare not fit for their purpose. For example, inKyrgyzstan there is an absence of adequatespace, buildings are falling down, there areold and dangerous electrical wiring systems,an absence of adequate heating, water andtoilets, and an absence of basic safety measures.The conditions of judicial premises in Kyrgyzstanand, to a lesser extent, other countries/territoriesin the region, make it difficult for the courts towork efficiently and ethically, and are incon-venient for the public. Lack of space for theseparation of parties has serious consequencesfor professional honesty in the work of courtsand public safety. Most importantly, bad con-ditions of judicial premises in Kyrgyzstan un-dermines the respect of citizens for the judicialsystem and the supremacy of the law

3.1.11. Alternative Dispute ResolutionMechanisms

Although the scope of the study did notinclude examining alternative dispute resolutionmechanisms (ADR), it is important to include afew comments, given the rising importanceof the use of ADR mechanisms throughoutthe region. In Kazakhstan, the judicial reformstrategy aims by 2020 to use extensively variousforms of conciliation and mediation. In Kyr-gyzstan, the Aksakals are local communitycourts or councils, which make decisions onmoral and family issues that may be in dispute,

and other certain limited issues such as contractsof employment and land disputes, and casesinvolving juveniles. They do not charge feesfor hearing cases and the law provides thatthey should aim to reconcile both sides andmake a fair decision, which does not contradictthe law. The 2002 law, which regulates the ac-tivities of the Aksakals severely limits the penal-ties that they can impose. In some parts ofKyrgyzstan these courts function well andmany citizens, including women, PWDs andminorities apply to them successfully to protecttheir rights. However this is not the casethroughout Kyrgyzstan.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina despite the ex-istence of the Law on Mediation and an Asso-ciation of Mediators, mediation is still not usedto the extent that it could be. This is also thecase in other countries/territories in the regionincluding Serbia. In Bosnia and Herzegovinathe Association of Mediators has developedmediation guide books for judges, lawyers andusers of mediation services, as well as leafletson mediation. None of these are in any minoritylanguage. Also, there is no clear outreach strat-egy on the dissemination of materials designedfor possible users of mediation services, includingwomen, PWDs and minorities. In Serbia, theLaw on Mediation is currently being revisedby a specialized Working Group, establishedby the Ministry of Justice. The mandate of theCommissioner for the Protection of Equality,the national human rights institution for equality,is to consider mediation as a first recourse inall complaints that it receives.51

27


51 See Article 38, Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination, 2010. To date, the Commissioner has not referred anycases to mediation.

4.1. Findings

Based on the analysis of the different na-tional studies, the following generalized findingscan be made in relation to the capacities ofthe courts in the selected countries/territoriesto deal with women, persons with disabilitiesand minorities:

General Findings(i) There are differences in opinions, per-

ceptions and expectations on key aspects ofthe judicial system capacities between pro-fessionals from the judiciary on the one-handand courts users and non-governmental or-ganization (NGO) representatives on the other.

(ii) There is widespread discrimination anddiscriminatory practices against all targetgroups in all countries/territories that partici-pated in the study.

(iii) There is a lack of uniform and coordi-nated support by rule of law institutions insetting and implementing programmes onlegal reform and access to justice, in particularfor women, persons with disabilities and mi-norities.

(iv) The treatment of all citizens is not eq-uitable under the justice systems in force.

(v) There is widespread poverty in general,and in particular among PWDs, minorities and

women, which impinges on all aspects of life,including access to justice.

(vi) There is a generally low level of educa-tion, high level of illiteracy and lack of knowl-edge among PWDs, minorities and womenon their rights and protection mechanisms ingeneral.

(vii) There is widespread public prejudicetowards PWDs, minorities and women.

(viii) There is insufficient awareness of judges,prosecutors, lawyers and court personnel onthe specific needs/demands of PWDs, minoritiesand women generally, and in relation to therealisation of their rights in particular.

(ix) There is a lack of adequately accessibleinformation in courts on the realisation ofrights and court procedures specifically de-signed for PWDs, minorities and women.

(x)There is a lack of adequately accessibleinformation in courts on free legal aid systemsand providers (both public agencies and/orNGOs).

Findings: Women(i) Gender-based violence is one of the

most frequent issues facing women in the re-gion.

(ii) There is a lack of sufficient awarenessand knowledge among judges, prosecutorsand police and among the general population

28


Findings and Recommendations4

of what constitutes gender-based violence aswell as other issues such as sexual and work-place harassment and trafficking, all of whichdisproportionately affect women over men.

(iii) Discrimination against women is com-mon throughout the region and the most dis-criminated against are women with disabilities,minority women, single mothers, older womenand those living in rural areas.

(ix) There is continuing discrimination againstwomen in public life, including public compa-nies and steering boards, as well as executivebodies in the economic sector.

(v) Stereotyped gender roles as a deter-mining factor in the choice of profession andemployment of women, and a growing trendof women educated and employed in theservices sector is observed throughout the re-gion. Furthermore, discriminatory recruitmentpractices are prevalent and there is a lack ofgender-sensitive measures to stimulate em-ployment for women.

(vi) Women in rural areas in all thecountries/territories studied are disproportion-ately more exposed to poverty and a hardereconomic situation due to their very limitedsources of income. Women in rural areas aremore often marginalized and their role is oftenneglected.

Findings: Persons with Disabilities(i) Despite the existence of a legal framework

to protect them, PWDs are still faced with dis-crimination and marginalization often becauseregulations are not implemented and thereare omissions in other laws.

(ii) PWDs face numerous problems, includingaccess to health care and related costs; limitedaccess to education (due to which their levelof literacy is lower than the average citizen);and a higher degree of poverty and the distri-bution of poverty compared to other citizens.

(iii) One of the most serious obstacles isthe high level of illiteracy and low education,which is as a result of general social exclusion,a lack of inclusive education programmes, in-adequate legislation and awareness and a lack

of adequate physical access to the majority ofpublic institutions, including courts.

(iv) The majority of professionals and courtusers throughout the region were of the opinionthat access to justice is sometimes or usuallyharder for PWDs.

(v) The majority of the court buildings inthe region neither have appropriate entrancesfor PWDs nor layout within the court buildingsto support PWDs.

(vi) PWDs continue to face significant ob-stacles and barriers in accessing justice. Reasonsfor this include distrust of the existing system,costs, lack of information and knowledge, in-accessibility of court and related buildings,transport, infrastructure of towns and citiesand the absence of interpreters.

(vii) Despite the large number of legal prob-lems, citizens, especially those with disabilitiesrarely go to court and if they do, they are notalways sure of a fair resolution of disputes.

Findings: Minorities(i) Institutional and societal discrimination

persist against minority communities in theareas of employment, education, social services,language use, freedom of movement, theright to return, and other basic rights. Thisdiscrimination also translates to minorities’abilities in accessing the justice system.

(ii) Roma people’s lack of registration andpossession of identity documents continuesto represent one of the main obstacles for theenjoyment of their social, economic and civilrights and their inaccessibility to basic healthcare services, any kind of social welfare, edu-cation, employment, housing, and access tocourts and other protection mechanisms.

(iii) Access to information in a minoritylanguage is one of the main issues facing mi-norities in the region.

(iv)The legal arrangements for interpretersin all countries/territories need further im-provement.

(v) All minority court users were of theopinion that they are sometimes or usuallytreated with less respect.

29


52 A.H. Monjurul Kabir, Policy Adviser and Regional Programme Manager for Human Rights, Justice and Legal Em-powerment, UNDP Bratislava Regional Centre, UNDP DG Insights, 16 December 2011.

Findings: Free Legal Aid(i) Among the countries/territories partici-

pating in the study, the framework surroundingfree legal aid differs but in all instances couldbe improved.

(ii) Free legal aid continues to be providedto a greater or lesser degree by NGOs, irre-spective of the formal provisions.

(iii) Existing legal aid mechanisms are eitherconsidered to be ineffective, there is no infor-mation on their operation, particularly in ruralareas, or they operate mainly in a languagenot understood by minorities.

Findings: Judicial and Public Administra-tion

(i) In most countries in the region, there isa distinct lack of confidence in the judicial sys-tems.

(ii) The justice system is inefficient; judgeshave a traditional (patriarchal) approach withstereotyped attitudes towards vulnerable groups;there is a lack of institutional coordination; thereis a lack of adequate training; and there is cor-ruption, non-adherence to principles of equalityand fair treatment, and a deficiency in imple-mentation and the full application of the law.

(iii) Public servants who are conductingadministrative proceedings often lack awarenessand training on the specific needs and rightsof PWD, minorities and women, due to whichthe target groups are often deprived of theirbasic rights or access to which is difficult andprolonged.

Findings: Judicial Training and Integrity(i) There is an almost total absence of

training for judges, lawyers and court staffthroughout the region on issues relating towomen, PWDs and minorities.

(ii) The majority of judges, lawyers andcourt staff do not possess any knowledge re-

lating to issues concerning women, PWDs andminorities.

(iii) The legal community within the coun-tries/territories studied is generally not sufficientlyeducated about the application of internationalstandards related to non-discrimination andmethods to prove discrimination as stipulatedby the laws and how to provide relief.

Finding: Access to Information and PublicAwareness

(i) Throughout the region, it can be saidthat there is not enough understanding ofdiscrimination as a concept among the public,so individuals often do not even recognizecertain behaviour as discriminatory.

(ii) Signs in courts, information and formsin civil proceedings and laws and regulationsare usually not available in minority languages.

(iii) The courts do not have adequately ac-cessible information specifically tailored to theneeds and demands of the target groups

Finding: Alternative Dispute Resolution(i) The use of ADR mechanisms throughout

the region is becoming more and more im-portant.

4.2. Recommendations

UNDP’s niche is its “diverse developmentmandate, strong country-level programmingand policy presence and partnerships with na-tional and local level institutions”.52 In thiscontext and in view of the findings that havebeen drawn from the analysis of the nationalstudies, combined with the supplementarydesk research, the followings recommendationsare made. All recommendations are made inline with international standards and best in-ternational practise and focus on the devel-

30


53 Likewise for police and other institutions dealing with the public, although not covered within the scope of thestudy.

54 As per the Human Rights Council, Forum on Minority Issues, Fourth session Geneva, 29-30 November 2011: draftrecommendations on guaranteeing the rights of minority women.

opment of legal empowerment tools as wellas institution-building activities. The recom-mendations can be applied throughout theECIS region, and not just in those countrieswhere the survey took place.

(i) Legislative reform: UNDP should providetechnical support to governments to reviewexisting legislation for compliance with inter-national standards on non-discrimination andminority rights. UNDP should develop strategiesfor more effective implementation of non-dis-crimination legislation, such as individual com-plaints mechanisms that are accessible to all.Constitutional reform is a good entry point forthe legislative protection of minorities. Consti-tutional guarantees of protection and promotionof minority rights exist in many countries. Effortscould be made to understand what legal pro-tections for minority rights have been adoptedin national laws to give effect to the constitutionalprovisions. Examples of laws that should be in-troduced include laws on free legal aid andmediation (see below), and anti-discrimination,and reviews of civil and criminal proceduralcodes to ensure compliance with internationalhuman and minority rights standards.

(ii) Strengthening Systems of Free LegalAid: As access to justice relies largely on rea-sonable access to legal services, the liberalizationof the market for legal services should be pur-sued in the process of adopting the draft freelegal assistance laws in the Western Balkansand introducing them in the Commonwealthof Independent States (CIS), and in relation toalready existing laws. To that end, advocacyefforts should be planned with NGO serviceproviders to push for the inclusion of NGOsinto the public free legal system and to redefinethe conditions for the receipt of free legal aidby PWDs, minorities and women. This wouldlead to the creation of more efficient legal aid

systems utilising the network of experiencedNGO legal service providers, which would bemore responsive to the specific needs of PWDs,minorities and women. This kind of interventionby UNDP would support the continuation offree legal counselling, advice and legal repre-sentation of these groups by NGOs UNDPshould aim to develop the activities of legalaid commissions in rural areas with a view totargeting women, minorities and PWDs. Legalaid should be targeted at and made moreeasily accessible to women, PWDs and minori-ties, including by means of outreach and theprovision of translation services in minoritylanguages. Information campaigns should becarried out for all citizens, but in particular thetarget groups.

(iii) Development of comprehensivepre- and in-service judicial training pro-grammes on human, gender, PWD and mi-nority rights: In cooperation with the judicialtraining centres in the region, UNDP shoulddevelop comprehensive training programmes.Training should be provided to all judges,lawyers and court staff53 in the region on in-ternational minority/gender/PWD rights stan-dards, domestic minority/gender/PWD rightslegislation and frameworks, and other relevantregulations, laws and practices. In line withbest international practise, training should beprovided on equality and diversity awareness,how to deal with vulnerable victims and wit-nesses from the target groups, and ethicstraining. Training needs to be linked to practicalskills in order to be effective. Institutionalisedtraining on gender equality and women’srights, including national, regional and inter-national human rights law and jurisprudence,should be established and be made compul-sory, so as to ensure the consistent applicationof a gender perspective.54 Training should also

31


55 It is important to include associations/organizations that represent the vulnerable groups in preparing trainingmodules and co-lecturing. First, this will help to lower the level of prejudice towards these categories, andsecond and most important, is that most of these categories know how to represent their needs and rights, anddeal with the challenges that they face.

be provided on international human rightslaw and jurisprudence, in particular genderequality and women’s rights, for all judicialactors, as an important requisite for an inde-pendent and impartial judiciary. Active par-ticipation of the target groups in choosingthe training methodology and content iscrucial and should be promoted by UNDP.55

(iv) Inclusion of civil society: in efforts toenhance access to justice for women, PWDsand minorities, UNDP should foster the creationof more effective relationships between inter-national donors, government bodies, CSOsand the target groups in order to create a dif-ferent atmosphere and better understandingof their specific needs, more effective rightsprotection and social inclusion. Enhanced in-clusion of civil society most often leads togreater accountability and reduced discrimi-nation. See also (v) below.

(v) Dialogue and networking: There isan obvious difference in perception betweenpublic service providers, professionals andcourt users with regard to access to informationand services, efficiency of the judiciary andequal treatment of PWDs, minorities and womenbefore the courts, as illustrated through theresults of the surveys. Thus there is a need fordialogue in order to bridge the gap betweenthe service providers and service users. Thiswould be the basis for more efficient awarenessraising of the specific needs of PWD, minoritiesand women and of the means available to thejudiciary to meet those specific needs withinthe existing legal system. UNDP should developactivities to ensure that civil society, relevantauthorities and public service providers find away to create a platform for better dialogueand networking. This would ensure more activeparticipation and cooperation with civil society

for the enhancement of justice, especially forPWD, minorities and women within the accessto justice pillar.

(vi) Mainstream issues of women, PWDsand minorities: UNDP should facilitate andsecure that the participatory process is in placein countries in the region when they are de-veloping different strategies. The participatoryprocess would secure representation of civilsociety groups and representative organisationsof PWD, minorities and women in policy making.Such policies would be sufficient to provide aplatform for community-based interventionsto act quickly and mobilise resources to addressthe needs of the vulnerable groups at thegrass-root level. Hence it is also necessary tosecure the participatory process and the in-clusion of these vulnerable groups in communitylevel planning processes (for example, theprocess of preparing the budget for the nextyear by the local governments). Local govern-ments could, for example, make a decision onthe administrative services to regulate freelegal aid and representation for PWDs, minoritiesand women in the community.

(vii) Ensure everyone has a legal identity:As legal identity is a cornerstone of access tojustice, efforts should be taken by UNDP, andprogrammes developed to foster the legalidentity process. To that end specific campaignsshould be designed in cooperation with com-munity-based minority NGOs and national hu-man rights institutions or agencies to informthe minority communities, in particular theRoma, on the necessity and benefits of legalidentification as well as providing them withpractical information on the process to en-courage them to get involved. This includesthe development of a specific outreach strategyand a more dynamic media campaign, but

32


also planning on how to minimise any adverseconsequences and mitigate risks.

(viii) Improve physical accessibility tothe courts and other public institutions: Al-though some efforts have been undertakenin the region, it is necessary to develop, in co-operation with relevant governmental bodies,further measures to enhance physical accessi-bility to judicial and other rights protection in-stitutions for PWDs. UNDP should also work toimprove the organisation and layout of courtsto facilitate the access of PWDs, minorities andwomen to relevant legal information in courtsthrough help desks and/or adequate sign sys-tems in the court facilities that would alloweasy access to necessary information, takinginto account the specific needs of PWDs, mi-norities and women. Special attention shouldbe given to the information on court procedures,necessary documentation and on free legalaid system and providers (both public agenciesand/or NGOs), including the location of legalaid providers, contact information and acces-sibility criteria in minority languages.

(ix) Improve legal literacy and access toinformation: Support should be provided byUNDP to NGO legal service providers and com-munity-based organizations working withPWDs, minorities and women to develop pro-grammes with regard to basic legal aware-ness-raising, or “legal literacy” work not onlyfor the members of these groups to educatethem on their legal rights and obligations, in-stitutional structures of the legal system, andspecific mechanisms that they can use to ad-vance their interests, including the mediationprocess, but also to the population at large.This can include, but is not limited to: print,broadcast and Internet media, social media,information flyers, pamphlets and posters; out-reach campaigns via radio and television andthe performing arts; and wireless/SMS tools.In cooperation with relevant Ministries andEmployment Agencies, support should be pro-vided to the creation and financing of a systemof community-based paralegals, preferablyfrom young, educated, but unemployed mem-

bers of the three target groups. Paralegalswould receive specific and adequate trainingand would serve as community-based focalpoints for provision of basic legal advice toPWDs, minorities and women and liaise withlegal service providers. UNDP should also de-velop specific outreach tools aimed at the dis-semination of information on courts and courtprocedures that have already been developed(for example, the Care of Court Users Strategy,as developed in Bosnia and Herzegovina) andare specifically designed for the needs of PWDs,minorities and women.

(x) Promote the role of the ombudsper-son and National Human Rights Institutions:The Ombudsperson’s role is critical in addressingand recommending the elimination of dis-crimination and the violation of citizens’ rightsand interests by discriminatory decisions ofpublic authorities. The institution of the Om-budsman also acts as a watchdog for the lawsapproved by local authorities in order to ensuretheir adherence to international human rightsstandards and law requirements on good gov-ernance. UNDP should provide support to na-tional Ombudspersons institutions and shouldsupport National Human Rights Institutions(NHRIs) to improve their capacity to protectminority rights. In addition to improvementsin non-discrimination legislation and enforce-ment, NHRIs may need guidance on the contentand application of minority rights. Differenttypes of awareness-raising and capacity-buildingactivities should be considered.

(xi) Media: The media also plays a funda-mental role in performing watchdog functions(for example, through investigative journalism).However, it can equally jeopardise access tojustice through deficient or saturated reporting.Enhancing reporting capacities of media onhuman rights and access to justice issues im-proves the enabling environment for successfuljustice reforms. Communication strategiesshould be tailored to the target audiences,that is, women, PWDs and minority communitiesthat suffer from exclusion or acute vulnerability,and presented in user-friendly formats.

33


56 As per Council of Europe Committee of Ministers Recommendations No. R (2002) 10 and No. R (99) 19, which rec-ommend the use of mediation in civil and criminal proceedings.

(xii) Promote Alternative Dispute Res-olution Mechanisms (ADR): Traditional sys-tems of justice are important to many minoritycommunities. The adoption of ADR mecha-nisms is one means of improving access tojustice for these minority groups. This maytake several forms, including recognition oftraditional law in some areas of law (for ex-ample, divorce, property); use of traditionalmediators from minority communities tosettle disputes; and training paralegals fromminority communities to aid in dispute reso-lution and advise on the use of formal judicialservices. Mainstream judicial actors may beeducated about traditional justice systemsas appropriate. UNDP should promote theuse of ADR/mediation in both civil and criminalproceedings56 and should promote its use indiscrimination cases, in accordance with theEuropean Commission against Racism andIntolerance General Policy RecommendationsNo. 2 and No. 7, which states that one of thekey functions of national human rights insti-tutions is to assist victims of discriminationby providing them with support in seekingout-of-court settlements of complaints. Sys-tems of ADR should be developed and pro-moted throughout the region in order to en-hance and extend access to justice.

(xiii) Establish and Maintain TrackRecord Systems in courts: UNDP shouldrecommend that courts start keeping andmaintaining records and statistics on thestructure of the employees and clients in thejudicial system based on gender, nationalityand disability and keep records and statisticson court cases involving woman, minoritiesand PWDs. Improvements should be madeto enable court management systems (CMS),where they exist to specifically register dis-crimination cases and to provide informationto the relevant institutions, as provided for

by the anti-discrimination laws/constitutions.This would enable compliance with interna-tional standards and establish the basis forthe track record system as required by theEuropean Union (EU) in the accession process(Chapter 23 – section on Fundamental Rights).UNDP Serbia has already designed an ADRdatabase that records this type of information.The database is being piloted by the (NHRI)for equality in cases of discrimination inSerbia. This database could be use as a tem-plate and replicated among other countriesin the region.

(xiv) Community-based interventions:In order to ensure better observance of rightsand justice by PWDs, minorities and womenat the grass-roots level, UNDP should designspecific interventions focusing on the acces-sibility to judicial and other service-orientedinstitutions; availability of adequate legal in-formation and advice; and, finally, legal rep-resentation. The impact of such interventionswould be high and easily measured. Civil so-ciety would be an important partner andpotential facilitator of such local communityinterventions whereas responsible institutionswould be targeted as the secondary benefi-ciary group. There is also a need to engageparalegals at the community level; this servicecould bridge an obvious need at the grassrootslevel where the demand of vulnerable groupsis high and free professional assistance is dif-ficult to find.

(xv) Strengthening of Judicial Institu-tions’ Capacities: UNDP should create ac-tivities to develop the coordination betweenlegal/rule of law institutions, both local andinternational, in improving the rule of lawand access to justice for identifying andraising issues of interest to citizens and tothe practitioners themselves. More institu-tionalised and organised cooperation between

34


expert teams within the social work centres,police departments and judiciary throughthe creation and adoption of clearly definedactions, measures and detailed guidelinesfor procedures of these bodies should alsobe developed.

(xvi) Introduction of E-Justice Systems:Following the best practise example of Turkey,

which has also been adapted to the Kaza-khstan judicial system, systems of e-justiceshould be introduced to enhance the effi-ciency and expediency of justice. Once sys-tems are introduced, extensive training willbe required for all stakeholders and outreachefforts should be made to promote the systemthroughout the respective countries/territories.

35


The study shows that the main barriers toenhanced access to justice for women, PWDsand minorities are widespread poverty andpublic prejudice, low education of the targetgroups and lack of legal literacy. The most sig-nificant obstacles in accessing the courts arecosts and duration of proceedings. Additionally,judges, lawyers and court staff lack sufficientawareness and knowledge about the specificdemands of these groups and need moretraining and awareness.

In general, it can be said that despite theprogress that has been realised with regard tothe development of the formal and legal frame-work and public policies in the field of promotingand protecting women’s, PWDs’ and minorities’rights, these groups in the region still do nothave equal opportunities when it comes topolitical participation and are underrepresentedin political decision-making within the legislative,executive and judicial authorities at all levels.There is a lack of political will, and the culturalenvironment and social conditions do notfavour the improvement of the position ofwomen, PWDs and minorities in society. Overall,disability, gender and minority issues are notmainstreamed, which has a significant impacton the social exclusion of women, PWDs andminorities and results in the inefficient resolutionof their problems.

The efforts of the long and ongoing legaland judicial reform processes throughout theregion have been focused too much on lawsand institution building and too little on devel-opment and legal empowerment of the poorand civil society. Although almost all the adoptedstrategies for PWD, minorities and women dorecognise the need to increase knowledge onrights and protection mechanisms, none ofthese documents have specific activities to thisend. It therefore seems that such commitmentsreflected in different policy documents and re-ports have little effect on the situation on theground, especially at the grass-roots level. In this context, UNDP needs to enable a stronglink between policy-level interventions andoperational outcomes, which improve the livesof the target groups. It needs to adopt a com-prehensive programmatic approach throughoutthe region to maximise the linkages amongthe different stakeholders (both rights-holdersand duty-bearers) and act as a platform forpromoting the coordination and capacity de-velopment of national actors to engage inplanning, reform and multi-stakeholder dialogue.Through its justice and human rights initiative,UNDP should ensure that it increases the ca-pacities of judicial institutions throughout theregion to meet the needs and demands ofwomen, persons with disabilities and minorities.

36


Conclusion5

37


Annex I Snapshot of Country/Territory Profiles

Country/Issue Bosnia and Herzegovina Kazakhstan Kosovo Kyrgyzstan Serbia

Human Rights protect-ed in Constitution Yes Yes Yes Yes

Human DevelopmentIndex Ranking57 74/187 68/187 126/187 59/187

Income Level58 Upper middle Upper middle Lower middle Lower middle Upper middle

% of population livingin poverty59 14% 15.4% 45% 43% 6.6%

GNI per capita US$60 4,790 7,440 3,300 880 5,810

Composition

48% Bosniak37% Serb 14% Croats1% Roma61

86%Kazakhstani9% Russian1.5% Ukrainian3.5% Others3% PWDs

92% Albanian4% Serb4% Turk/ Bosni-ak/ Roma62

90% Serb2.5% Bosniak1.4% Roma1.1% Albanian 5% Others

Judicial Reform process

Ongoing 2009-2013, newphase launchedby EC in 2011

Ongoing until2020

Ongoing, newNational JudicialReform Strategysigned 2012-2017

Free legal aid law No – requestedby EC

No – limited pro-visions in Civiland Criminal Pro-cedural Codes

No – but pro-vided for un-der Regulation2006/36

Yes

Anti-discrimination law Yes No Yes Yes

Law to protect minori-ties Yes No Yes

Law/policy to protectPWDs Yes No Yes

Gender protection law Yes No Yes

57 The Human Development Index is used as a reference for both social and economic development by cross-ref-erencing health, education and living standards. For further information see http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/hdi/

58 As per the World Bank data and statistics on countries and economies http://data.worldbank.org/country 59 Ibid.60 Ibid.61 These figures are based on data collected in 2000 and have the potential of being significantly different now

due to a large number of returnees (over 1 million) in the last 10 years. The 2011 census has not taken place dueto the current political situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The number of Roma is estimated due to their lackof formal registration.

62 No official census has been carried out in Kosovo since 1991, when the Albanian population boycotted thecensus, although official projections estimated them to represent 82% of the population, with 10% Serb and2.3% Roma.

ANNEX IIStrengthening Judicial Integrity through Enhanced Access to Justice

UNDP Regional Survey – Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan andSerbia 2011

PROFESSIONALS QUESTIONNAIRE

A. PROFILE

1. Profession (please circle the correct answer): a) Judgeb) Prosecutor’s officec) Lawyer d) Court staffe) NGO – please state whichf ) Other – please specify

If d, e or f, please go to question 2.

If a) What is the time spent by the Judge in Court service? If b) or c) What is the number of days spent per week in court? What is the number of years in practice?

2. Education level – please circle just one (the highest attained):a) Incomplete primary educationb) Completed primary educationc) Completed secondary school (Grade 10) d) High school (A-level) e) University degree in subject other than lawf ) Diploma or certificate in law from a recognized institutiong) LLBh) Masters or PhD.

4. Age – please circle just onea) 18-24b) 25-29 c) 30-34 d) 35-39 38


3. GenderMale Female

1 2

e) 40-44 f ) 45-49 g) 50-54 h) 55-59 i) 60-64 j) 65+

B. EFFICIENCY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

f 1 or 2, please skip to question 6.

if 3, 4 or 5

C. QUALITY OF SERVICES

39


5. In your experience, wouldyou say cases involvingwomen, minorities orPWDs are usually resolvedwithin a longer timeframethat those cases not in-volving these groups?

Never Seldom Sometimes Usually Always

1 2 3 4 5

6. In your opinion, is yourcountry’s justice systemcompetent


1 2 3 4 5

5.a.Select all the reasons that apply by marking 1 in the corresponding boxes

Yes

a) Lack of knowledge of court staff relating to cases involving women,minorities, persons with disabilities

a) Lack of knowledge of judges relating to cases involving women, mi-norities, persons with disabilities

c) Difficulties for women, minorities, persons with disabilities in accessing information

d) Difficulties for women, minorities, persons with disabilities in accessing legal assistance/representation

e) Other (please specify) ………..

D. ACCESSIBILITY

Please mark “Yes” answers by writing/marking “1” in the corresponding box; please mark“No” answers by writing “2” in the corresponding box; please mark “Don’t know” answersby writing “0” in the corresponding box

40


7. How would you rate thequality of your coun-try’s justice services

Unsatis-factory PoorNeither goodnor poor

GoodEx-cellent

1 2 3 4 5

8.a. Do you consider your justice system to be affordable for women?


1 2 3 4 5

8.b. Do you consider your justice system to be af-fordable for minorities?


1 2 3 4 5

8.c. Do you consider your justice system to be affordable for personswith disabilities?


1 2 3 4 5

9.

In your opinion what isthe level of availabilityof information on lawsand regulations forwomen, minorities andpersons with disabili-ties?

Very difficultto obtain

Difficultto obtain

Obtainable Easy toobtain

Veryeasy toobtain

1 2 3 4 5

If 4 or 5, please go to question 19.

If 1, 2 or 3 please answer the following:

E. FAIRNESS

Do you agree or disagree with the following statements? (1 = agree, 2 = neither agree nordisagree, 3 = disagree, 0 = Don’t know) 41


11. How would you gauge the physical accessibilityof the courts in your country?

Very difficult

Difficult Neither EasyVeryeasy

1 2 3 4 5

10.In your opinion, which personal characteris-tics (if any) negatively impact on a person’sability to access the courts

Yes NoDon’t know

a) Age 1 2 0

b) Economic Status 1 2 0

c) Education level 1 2 0

d) Gender 1 2 0

e) Disability 1 2 0

f) Ethnicity 1 2 0

11.a.In your opinion, which factors negativelyimpact on a woman/minority/PWD’s abilityto physically access the courts

Yes NoDon’tknow

a) Geographical distance of court 1 2 0

a) Position of court building 1 2 0

b) Layout within the court 1 2 0

c) Access to information 1 2 0

d) Associated costs 1 2 0

42


12.In your experience do thecourt(s) treat the following categories of people equally?

AgreeNeitheragree nordisagree

DisagreeDon’tknow

a) Men and women 1 2 3 0

b) Rich(er) and poor(er) 1 2 3 0

c) Persons with disabilitiesand persons without disabili-ties

1 2 3 0

d) Minorities and the majoritypopulation

1 2 3 0

13.

In your opinion what are the 3 most significant obstacles for women/minorities/persons with disabilities in accessing the courts in yourcountry? Please select them by marking “1” in the correspondingboxes

Yes

a) Official payments to judges and courts too high

b) Unofficial payments to judges and courts too high

c) Outside legal services too expensive

d) Access to information in minority languages not available

e) Physical access to the court too hard

f) Process too long

g) Court decisions influenced by bribes

h) Court decisions are influenced by personal connections

i) Process too complex

j) Lack of effective enforcements of court decision

k) Courts located too far away

l) Other – please specify ………………………

43


14.Are the following sources of informationavailable in your country in minority languages?

Yes

1

No

2

Don’tknow0

a) Laws and regulations 1 2 0

b) Signs in court 1 2 0

c) Instructions and forms in civil proceedings 1 2 0

d) Information and indictments in criminalproceedings

1 2 0

e) Judgements 1 2 0

15.b. In your experience, doesthe state always providean interpreter to partieswho speak minority lan-guages?


1 2 3 4 5

16.a. In your experience, is itharder for a woman to access courts?


1 2 3 4 5

16.b. In your experience, is itharder for a woman to access a lawyer/obtain legal advice?


1 2 3 4 5

17.b. In your experience, is itharder for a minority toaccess a lawyer/obtain legal advice?


1 2 3 4 5

16.c. In your experience, dowomen get less respectfrom judges, lawyers andcourt staff?


1 2 3 4 5

17.a. In your experience, is itharder for a minority toaccess courts?


1 2 3 4 5

44


17.c. In your experience, dominorities get less re-spect from judges,lawyers and court staff?


1 2 3 4 5

18.a. In your experience, is itharder for a person withdisability to accesscourts?


1 2 3 4 5

18.b. In your experience, is itharder for a person withdisability to access alawyer/obtain legal ad-vice?


1 2 3 4 5

18.c. In your experience, dopersons with disabilitiesget less respect fromjudges, lawyers and courtstaff?


1 2 3 4 5

19.What types of problem do women specifically encounter in your coun-try? Please select them by marking “1” in the corresponding boxes

Yes

a) Property/land disputes

b) Gender-based violence

c) Dowry issues

d) Inheritance

e) Divorce and maintenance/alimony

f) Child custody

g) Crimes

h) Debts, loans, commercial conflict

i) Other – please specify ………………………

45


20.What types of problem do minorities specifically encounter in yourcountry? Please select them by marking “1” in the corresponding boxes

Yes

a) Property/land disputes

b) Personal documentation issues

c) Employment

d) Access to information in minority languages

e) Other – please specify ………………………

21.What types of problem do persons with disability specifically encounter in your country? Please select them by marking “1” in thecorresponding boxes

Yes

a) Access to health care

b) Access to education

c) Access to cultural events

d) Property/land disputes and inheritance


22.

In your country overall, please assessthe effectiveness of each institution orgroup in ensuring access to justice forwomen, minorities and persons withdisabilities in your country

Effec-tive

Neithereffectivenor inef-fective

In-effec-tive

Don’tknow

a) Courts 1 2 3 0

b) Lawyers 1 2 3 0

c) Prosecutors 1 2 3 0

d) NGOs 1 2 3 0

If respondent is court staff, from an NGO or other – thank you for participating in this question-naire!

SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR JUDGES, LAWYERS, PROSECUTORS AND COURT STAFF

If no, please go to question 25.

If yes,


If yes, 46


23.Which factors do you think would increase access to justice forwomen, minorities and persons with disabilities in your country?Please select them by marking “1” in the corresponding boxes

Yes

a) Improved laws and regulations

b) Increased training for judges

c) Increased training for court staff

d) Enhanced public awareness


24.a. Please provide details of the training as follows:

a) Type of training ………………

b) Format of training ………………

c) Total number of hours trained ……………

d) Frequency of training………………….

e) Any formal assessment ………………………

24. Have you undertaken any specific trainingrelated to women in the justice system?

Yes NoDon’tknow

1 2 0

25. Have you undertaken any specific trainingrelated to minorities in the justice system?

Yes NoDon’tknow

1 2 0


If yes,


If yes,

47


27.a. Please provide details as follows:

a) Type of procedure/process?

b) How were you made aware of these?













26. Have you undertaken any specific trainingrelated to persons with disabilities in thejustice system

Yes NoDon’tknow

1 2 0

27. Are you aware of any specific court proce-dures or processes that should be followedin cases involving issues related to women?

Yes NoDon’tknow

1 2 0

If 5, please go to question 28.

If 1,2 3 or 4,


If yes,

48


27.b. In your experience arethese procedures andprocesses applied in allcases involving issues related to women?


1 2 3 4 5

27.c. Please select all reasons that apply for them not being applied 1

a) Lack of awareness of judge

b) Lack of awareness of prosecutor

c) Lack of awareness of lawyer

d) Lack of awareness of woman

e) Other – please specify

28. Are you aware of any specific court proce-dures or processes that should be followedin cases involving issues related to minori-ties?

Yes NoDon’tknow

1 2 0




If 5, please go to question 29

If 1,2 3 or 4,

If no, thank you very much for participating in the questionnaire.

If yes,

49


28.b. In your experience arethese procedures andprocesses applied in allcases involving issues related to minorities?


1 2 3 4 5

29.b. In your experience arethese procedures andprocesses applied in allcases involving issues related to persons withdisabilities?


1 2 3 4 5

28.c. Please select all reasons that apply for them not being applied 1




d) Lack of awareness of minority


29. Are you aware of any specific court proce-dures or processes that should be followedin cases involving issues related to personswith disabilities?

Yes NoDon’tknow

1 2 0




If 5, thank-you very much for participating in this questionnaire

If 1,2 3 or 4,

Thank you for your participation!

50


29.c.Please select all reasons that apply for them not being applied bymarking 1

1




d) Lack of awareness of person with disability


ANNEX IIIStrengthening Judicial Integrity through Enhanced Access to Justice

UNDP Regional Survey – Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan andSerbia 2011

COURT USERS QUESTIONNAIRE

A. PROFILE

2. Education level – please circle just one (the highest attained):i) Incomplete primary educationj) Completed primary educationk) Completed secondary school (Grade 10) l) High school (A-level) m) University degree in subject other than lawn) Diploma or certificate in law from a recognized institutiono) LLBp) Masters or PhD.

3. Age – please circle just onea) 18-24b) 25-29 c) 30-34 d) 35-39 e) 40-44 f ) 45-49 g) 50-54 h) 55-59 i) 60-64 j) 65+

4. Type of case – please circle just one (if respondent has been involved in more than onetype of case, please complete a separate questionnaire for each case).

51


1. GenderMale Female

1 2

What types of case have you been involved in? Please select by mark-ing “1” in the corresponding boxes

Yes

a) Civil

b) Criminal

c) Administrative

B. EFFICIENCY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

If 2 or 0, please go to question 7.

If 1

C. QUALITY OF SERVICES

52


5. How many times were you requiredto be present in court in order to re-solve your case?

0-1 2-3 4-5 6+

1 2 3 4

7. How long did your case take to resolve?

0-6months

7-12months

13-24months

25+months

1 2 3 4

6.a. Please provide further information ……………….

9.

Based on your experience, pleaseevaluate the quality of the servicesprovided by different operators inthe justice system

Verypoor

Poor

Neitherpoornorgood

GoodVerygood

a) Judges 1 2 3 4 5

b) Prosecutors 1 2 3 4 5

b) State attorneys 1 2 3 4 5

c) Private attorneys 1 2 3 4 5

d) Courts clerks 1 2 3 4 5

e) Court staff 1 2 3 4 5

6. Do you think your case would have been resolved more quickly if you were not awoman/minority/person with disability?

Yes NoDon’tknow

1 2 0

8. Do you believe your country’s justicesystem is quick?

Yes No Don’t know

1 2 0

D. ACCESSIBILITY

Please mark “Yes” answers by writing/marking ”1” in the corresponding box; please mark ”No”answers by writing “2” in the corresponding box; please mark ”Don’t know” answers by writing ”0”in the corresponding box.

53


10. In your opinion, is yourcountry’s justice systemcompetent?


1 2 3 4 5

11. Do you consider yourcountry’s justice systemto be affordable for all?


1 2 3 4 5

12.

In your experience,what is the level ofavailability of informa-tion on laws and regula-tions for women, mi-norities and personswith disabilities?

Very difficultto obtain

Difficultto obtain

Obtainable Easy toobtain

Veryeasy toobtain

1 2 3 4 5

13.Did any of the following characteristics negatively impact on your ability to accessthe justice system?

Yes NoDon’t know

a) Age 1 2 0

b) Economic Status 1 2 0

c) Education level 1 2 0

d) Gender 1 2 0

e) Disability 1 2 0

f) Ethnicity 1 2 0

14. How would you rate thephysical accessibility ofthe courts in your coun-try?

Very difficult

Difficult Neither EasyVeryeasy

1 2 3 4 5

If 4 or 5, please go to question 15

If 1, 2 or 3

E. FAIRNESSDo you agree or disagree with the following statements? (1- agree, 2- neither agree nor disagree,3 - disagree, 0-Don’t know)

54


14.a.Which factors impaired your ability to access the courts – please select all thosethat apply

Yes NoDon’tknow

a) Geographical distance of court 1 2 0

a) Position of court building 1 2 0

b) Layout within the court 1 2 0

c) Access to information 1 2 0

d) Associated costs 1 2 0

15.Were you able to access the following sourcesof information in a language that you couldunderstand?

Yes

1

No

2

Don’tknow0

a) Laws and regulations 1 2 0

b) Signs in court 1 2 0

c) Instructions and forms in civil proceedings 1 2 0

d) Information and indictments in criminalproceedings

1 2 0

e) Judgements 1 2 0

16.In your experience do the Court(s) treat thefollowing categories of people equally?

AgreeNeitheragree nordisagree

DisagreeDon’tknow

a) Men and women 1 2 3 0

b) Rich(er) and poor(er) 1 2 3 0

c) Persons with disabilities and personswithout disabilities

1 2 3 0

d) Minorities and the majority population 1 2 3 0

If 2 or 0, please could to question 20.

If 155


17.

In your opinion what are the 3 most significant obstacles forwomen/minorities/persons with disabilities in accessing the courts inyour country? Please select them by marking “1” in the correspondingboxes.

Yes

a) Official payments to judges and courts too high

b) Unofficial payments to judges and courts too high

c) Outside legal services too expensive

d) Access to information in minority languages not available

e) Physical access to the court too hard

f) Process too long

g) Court decisions influenced by bribes

h) Court decisions are influenced by personal connections

i) Process too complex

j) Lack of effective enforcements of court decision

k) Courts located too far away

l) Other – please specify ………………………

18.Did you face any problems in your interaction with the justice system?Please select all those that apply by marking “1”.

Yes

a) Disrespect

b) Impoliteness

c) Prejudice

d) Unfair trial

e) Difficulties in obtaining documents

f) Other – please specify

19. Do you think your judgement wouldhave been different if you were not awoman/minority/person with disability?

Yes No Don’t know

1 2 0

SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR FEMALE RESPONDENTS

56


20.

In your country overall, please assessthe effectiveness of each institution orgroup in ensuring access to justice forwomen, minorities and persons withdisabilities in your country

Effec-tive

Neithereffectivenor inef-fective

In-effec-tive

Don’tknow

a) Courts 1 2 3 0

b) Lawyers 1 2 3 0

c) Prosecutors 1 2 3 0

d) NGOs 1 2 3 0

19.a. Please select all those that apply: Yes

1

No

2

Don’tknow0

(i) The judgement would have been less inmy favour 1 2 0

(ii) The judgement would have been morein my favour 1 2 0

21.a. In your experience, is itharder for a woman to ac-cess courts?


1 2 3 4 5

21.b. In your experience, is itharder for a woman to access a lawyer/obtain legal advice?


1 2 3 4 5

21.c. In your experience, dowomen get less respectfrom judges, lawyers andcourt staff?


1 2 3 4 5

SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR MINORITIES

SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

Thank you for your participation!57


23.a. In your experience, is itharder for a minority toaccess courts?


1 2 3 4 5

22. In your experience, doesthe state always providean interpreter at allstages of proceedings toparties who speak minor-ity languages?


1 2 3 4 5

23.b. In your experience, is itharder for a minority toaccess a lawyer/obtain le-gal advice?


1 2 3 4 5

23.c. In your experience, dominorities get less re-spect from judges,lawyers and court staff?


1 2 3 4 5

24.a. In your experience, is itharder for a person withdisability to accesscourts?


1 2 3 4 5

24.b. In your experience, is itharder for a person withdisability to access alawyer/obtain legal ad-vice?


1 2 3 4 5

24.c. In your experience, dopersons with disabilitiesget less respect fromjudges, lawyers and courtstaff?


1 2 3 4 5

Analysis of the national studies on the capacities of the judicial institutions to

address the needs/demands of persons with disabilities, minorities and women

Strengthening

Judicial Integritythrough Enhanced Access to Justice


U N D P R E G I O N A L C E N T R E F O R E U R O P E A N D T H E C I S


UNDP Regional CentreFor Europe and the CIS Grosslingova 35

811 09 Bratislava

Slovak Republic

Tel.: +421 2 5933 7111

Fax: +421 2 5933 7450


Lessons Learned Series: Rule of Law, Justice & Human Rights


Empowered lives. Strengthening Judicial Integrity to justice.pdf · Conduct, later called the...

Documents

Transcript of Empowered lives. Strengthening Judicial Integrity to justice.pdf · Conduct, later called the...