Methodological Issues in the Comparative Analysis of the Number of Judges, Administrative Personnel, and Court Performance Collected by the Commission for the Efficiency of Justice of the Council of Europe
Keywords:
Commission for the Efficiency of Justice, CEPEJ, judges, comparative analysisAbstract
This paper raises some methodological issues when a comparative approach is used to compare the number of judges, court personnel, and court performance in European judiciaries. Data come from the Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe, which also is the main source for the European Union Justice Scoreboard. Some proposals are made to improve the collection of data and, then, increasing their comparability. The paper shows how an assessment on the number of judges and court personnel can benefit from a cross country comparative perspective, but only if quantitative analysis come together with in-depth qualitative studies.
Este artículo plantea algunos problemas metodológicos que surgen cuando se abordan desde una perspectiva comparativa el número de jueces, el personal judicial y la actuación judicial en diferentes ámbitos judiciales europeos. Los datos provienen de la Comisión Europea para la Eficacia de la Justicia (CEPEJ, en inglés), del Consejo Europeo, que es también el origen principal de los Indicadores Europeos de la Justicia. Se hacen algunas propuestas para mejorar la recolección de datos y para aumentar su comparatividad. El artículo muestra que se puede hacer una mejor valoración del número de jueces y de miembros del personal judicial desde una perspectiva comparativa entre países, pero sólo si los análisis cuantitativos corren parejas con estudios comparativos en profundidad.
DOWNLOAD THIS PAPER FROM SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3040109
Downloads
Downloads:
PDF 703
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence, further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.