Revised A2J EFFORT indicators – Comments from Sandor – May 18
EXISTANCE AND QUALITY OF EFFORT (A2J)
CATEGORY
ISSUE /
SUBTOPIC
Scope of effort
Cost
A2J
Forums for judicial, quasi-judicial
and/or extra-judicial access to justice
(as applied to each forum addressed)
1. Are there standards for conflict of
interest, tenure, compensation,
appearance of impropriety and other
standards for constituting and
maintaining the forum to ensure its
independence and impartiality?
2. Is expertise brought and considered
by the forum?
3. Is expertise brought by the parties and
considered by the forum? the 2. and 3
seems to be closely related, could we
handle them together?
4. Is information including rules &
procedures, holdings & records of
forum, calendar of cases, info on
available other forums & types of cases
to be heard by forum, schedules of
forum members in publicly accessible
documents or webpage? (revised A2J 8,
9, 10)
5. Is an independent ombudsman /
inspector or publicly funded legal
advisor available to exercise oversight
of the forum and make sure that
applicable law, science and evidence is
considered and public interest
protected?
6.
7. Are costs of bringing a claim,
including forum fees, mandatory legal
representation, experts, eventual costs if
case is lost, other, high for low income
individuals and NGOs?2
Efforts to ensure meaningful access
to justice (as applied on a case-bybase basis)
Was expertise brought and considered
by the forum in selected case?
Was expertise brought by the parties
and considered by the forum in
selected case?
Were the parties to a process able to
gain access to information and
conduct fact finding relevant to the
selected case?
I do not feel them parallel, we might
put it into a separate line.
Was an independent oversight
ombudsman / inspector or legal
advisor available to support the party
seeking justice?1
Did the forum consider an adequate
scope of law and facts in this case?
Did the cost of bringing a claim,
including fees, mandatory legal
representation, experts, eventual costs
if case is lost, other, present a barrier
to the party?
1
We propose that this indicator is only included in forum. I agree.
Do we want to include a generic question about cost (e.g. what is the costs of a legal process as compared
to annual salary?) Yes.
2
Page 1 of 3
2/12/2016
Revised A2J EFFORT indicators – Comments from Sandor – May 18
CATEGORY
Fairness/
equitability of
the system/effort
Limits
Timeliness/
timing/
regularity
A2J
9. Is the forum accessible to different
ethnic, cultural, distant and other
groups? (in terms of geography,
language, etc.)3 It is kind os continuous
with the CB indicators, so it might not
be necessary to bring to many more
elements here.
10. Are the forum procedures supportive
of public access (in terms of clarity of
procedures, volume and complexity of
documents to be filed, places to file,
requirements for legal representation,
etc.) in selected case? (selected forum?)
11. Is standing in selected type of case
(this also would make sense, but, yet, it
is a change of viewpoint here compared
to the selected type of forums we have
examined upto here) interpreted by the
forum broadly to require proof of
interest/concern by individuals and civil
society organizations?
12. Are the forum’s restraining rules or
limits supportive of environmental and
“access” interests by allowing the use of
evidence without disclosing source,
participation of the party claiming
access/environmental rights to
participate in all stages of the case?
13. Is the forum efficient in terms of
processing and reviewing claims with
minimum delay?6
14.
Venues / outlets
15. Is there a choice of different forums
Was the forum accessible to different
ethnic, cultural, distant and other
groups (in terms of geography,
language, etc.)4 in this case?
Were the forum procedures supportive
of public access (in terms of clarity of
procedures, volume and complexity of
documents to be filed, places to file,
requirements for legal representation,
etc.) in selected case?
Was standing in selected case
interpreted by the forum broadly to
require proof of interest/concern by
the individuals or civil society
organizations – parties to the case?
Were the forum’s restraining rules or
limits supportive of environmental and
“access” interests by allowing the use
of evidence without disclosing source,
participation of the party claiming
access/environmental rights to
participate in all stages of the case,
other? 5
Was the forum efficient in terms of
processing and reviewing the selected
claim with minimum delay and not
longer than average duration7 of
review?
Did the process have a clear schedule
and provide adequate notice, time to
respond, etc. to both parties?
Was there a choice of different forums
3
Please consider what other elements could be included in the research guidelines.
Please consider what other elements could be included in the research guidelines.
5
Please propose a re-phrasing of these two indicators. The challenge is to figure out how to phase the
indicator as position, so that the highest value answer is “yes”.
6
Research guidelines for this indicator should address: measuring the average time for processing &
reviewing claims by a particular forum.
7
Average duration will be measured by the forum indicator #13.
4
Page 2 of 3
2/12/2016
Revised A2J EFFORT indicators – Comments from Sandor – May 18
CATEGORY
/ channels for
access
ISSUE/
SUBTOPIC
Government
Public
NGOs
Page 3 of 3
A2J
which could review the selected case
which could review the selected case
type (e.g. administrative, judicial,
type (e.g. administrative, judicial,
different courts, alternative, other)?
different courts, alternative, other)?
Efforts to build capacity for access to justice
16. Has the capacity of the forum members in this case been built on access to
information, participation and environmental legislation?
17. Are there clear, easily accessible guidelines and technical assistance for the
public on their rights to redress and remedy and how to use the forum to protect
these rights?
18. Are there various incentives (tax breaks, access to local and international
donors, etc.) for civil society or other relevant organizations for the purposes of
maintaining staff/expertise to offer legal assistance to the public in selected case?
2/12/2016