NATIONAL OFFICE FOR THE JUDICIARY ORSZÁGOS BÍRÓSÁGI H I VATA L

Transcription

1 NATIONAL OFFICE FOR THE JUDICIARY ORSZÁGOS BÍRÓSÁGI H I VATA L

2

3 I n t r o d u c t i o n The National Office for the Judiciary (NOJ) fulfills the duties of the central administration of the courts with a special consideration on the independency of judges since the 1 st of January Our main goal is to support the court in fulfilling their constitutional duty to finish procedures on a high level of professional competence and within reasonable time. By the optimalization of technical and human resources and by guaranteeing better access to justice we aim to have the legal disputes of citizens decided by transparent court, highly responsible judges in an efficient procedure. The acceptance of the Act CLXI of 2011 on the Organisation and Administration of Courts (AOAC) and Act CLXII of 2011 on the Legal Status and Remuneration of Judges ( ALSRJ) counts as the second reform of the Hungarian judicial (self)administration system since the change of political system (1990). The reason of the modification of the regulations is that the former board-like central administration especially it s practical functioning received many well founded critics. In the new administration system the responsibility for the professional guidance of the courts and for the central administration of the court system has been divided between the president of the Curia and the president of the National Office for the Judiciary (NOJ). Dr. Tünde Handó President of the National Office for the Judiciary

4 The Structure Of The Hungarian Court System Curia (1) Regional courts of appeal (5) Regional courts (19+1) District courts (131) Curia the supreme judiciary body is the Curia, it has app. 90 judges, judges upon the appeals filed against the decisions of the regional courts and of the regional courts of appeal, judges upon motions for review, adopts uniformity decisions, which are binding on all courts, performs the analysis of the judicial practice in the cases judged upon with final force, exploring and examining the sentencing practice of the courts, publishes guiding resolutions and guiding decisions, judge upon the collision of a local government decree with another statutory provision, and it may annul the local government decree, decides upon the establishment of the omission of the legislative duty based on an Act of Parliament of the local government, acts in other cases falling in its scope of competence. Regional courts of appeal the regional courts of appeal judge upon the appeals filed against the decisions of the district courts and the regional courts, and it shall act in other cases referred to its scope of competence, there are five regional court of appeals, they have app. 165 judges. Regional courts Regional courts hear cases in the first instance in the cases specified in an Act of Parliament and judge upon the appeals filed against the decisions of the district courts and the administrative and labour courts. there are 20 regional courts, which is usually referred as 19+1, because the Metropolitan regional court is in a special position (25% of the judges work at the Metropolitan regional court and the 40% of the ongoing cases are there) they have app. 960 judges. District courts they proceed as a court of first instance, there are 131 district courts, they have app judges, the administrative and labour courts on district level have took up their duties from 1st of January They proceed in the first instance in cases reviewing administrative decisions, and in labour cases. the district court is not a legal entity, however, its president may undertake a liability in accordance with the provisions on the management of state finances, in the manner specified by the inner regulation of the regional court

5 Appointment Requirements For Judges There are special requirements to be met to become a judge these are defined in Section 4 of the Act CLXII. of Hungarian citizenship Capability to act University degree in law Passing the professional legal examination Giving a property declaration Working at least one year in a position in which the professional legal examination is needed (e.g. court secretary) Being capable to work as a judge according to a physical and psychical examination Being over 30 years of age

6 The Typical Way Of Becoming A Judge In Hungary Earn a university degree in law (opt. 5 years) Apply for a trainee judge's position (there are app 359 positions in Hungary) An entrance exam is organized by the Hungarian Judicial Academy. The exam has a written and an oral par. The president of the high court / regional court of appeal can only choose from those applicants, who pass the exam. Work as a trainee judge (min. 3 years) During this period the trainee judges receive education at the court they are working at. Usually they spend some time in different legal fields of the court system and pass app. 20 exams. Pass the professional legal examination This examination is organized by the Ministry of Justice. It has written and oral part as well, on he fields of criminal law, civil law, administrative law, labour law and EU law. Apply for a court secretary's position (there are app. 614 positions in Hungary) There is no special procedure for this application, the president of the high court / regional court of appeal / curia appoints the successful applicant. Work as a court secretary (min. 1 year) During this period the court secretaries receive education at the Hungarian Judicial Academy. The topics of the education refer to the judicial profession, but they don't only cover up legal fields (e.g. psychology). Apply for a judge's position (there are app positions in Hungary) The successful applicant is appointed by the President of the Republic - 6 -

7 Forming The Order Of The Applicants For A Judge s Position The regulation of the Minister of Public Administration and Justice 7/2011. (III. 4.) KIM defines what attributes can be taken into account and how many points can be given in each category when the Judicial Council 1 hears the applicants: Categories Possible points (max.) The evaluation of previous work (e.g. as a trainee judge, 20 court secretary, judge) The time of legal practice and especially former judicial 15 practice The opinion of the judicial division (only if this judicial 20 body must form an opinion during the procedure) The result of the professional 10 legal examination Degree in legal sciences 15 Special (legal) qualification 15 Taking part in a study-trip to 5 abroad Language knowledge 10 Legal publication 10 Taking part in the obligatory and facultative courses of the 5 Judicial Academy Other professional activities (e.g. being a lecturer at the 10 faculty of law) The result of the hearing at 20 the Judicial Council Σ The Judicial Council (JC) is a self-governing body of the courts. There is a JC at each Regional Court, Regional Court of Appeal and at the Curia. The members of the JC are elected by the conference of judges of the court for six years. It is the JC s duty to: form an opinion on appointing, posting and transferring the judge, delegating the judge without his/her approval, and discharging the judge, it may initiate the examination of the president, vice president, head of group or deputy head of group of the district court and of the administrative and labour court, or his/her discharge, it shall form an opinion on the annual budget plan of the court and on the utilisation of the approved budget, and it shall form an opinion on the organisational and operational regulations and the case allocation plan of the court

8 Appointment Of Judges The President of the Court informs the President of the NOJ when a judiciary position becomes empty The President of the NOJ announces the call for applications to the empty judiciary position. There are special requirements to be fulfilled to become a judge these are defined in Section 4 of the Act CLXII. of The Judicial Council (a self-governing body elected by the judges at each High Court, Regional Court of Appeal and at the Curia) forms an opinion about the applicants and makes an order of them by giving points to evaluate their skills and attributes. The points and so the order is based on objective criteria defined in the Order of the Ministry of Justice, number 7/2011. (III.4.). The President of the Court makes a suggestion to the President of the NOJ, who should be appointed as a judge at the court. The President of the Court can only suggest the applicant who is the 1st, 2nd or the 3rd in the order formed by the Judicial Council. Furthermore, if he suggests the 2nd or the 3rd in order, he must explain the reasons in a written form. The President of the NOJ submits proposal to the President of the Republic who should be appointed as a judge. The President of the NOJ can only propose the applicant who is the 1st, 2nd or the 3rd in the order formed by the Judicial Council. Furthermore, if he suggests the 2nd or the 3rd in order, he must explain the reasons to the National Judicial Council. It is possible for those applicants who are not appointed to file a complaint against the decision of the President of the NOJ within 15 days. The Administrative and Labour Court judges the complaint within 15 days. The President of the Republic has the right to appoint the judge. His decision is not bound to the proposal

9 Transfer And Delegation Of Judges Transfer of judges Transferring the judge means that he/she will carry on his/her judicial activity at another court. The president of the NOJ shall decide on the transfer of a judge to another post, but only in the following cases: 1./ The judge successfully applied to an empty judicial position at that other court (note: to start an application process is the voluntary decision of the judge). Transfer of a judge (1) a judge s position becomes empty a judge from another court applies after a normal application procedure the judge is transferred by the president of the NOJ (note: there is no need to appoint the judge once again, because he/she already is a judge so the process ends at the President of the NOJ) 2./The court where the judge worked is dismissed (this is the decision of the Parliament) or the territory of the court is substantially reduced (this is also the decision of the Parliament) and it is not possible to employ the judge at that court anymore. If one of these events occur, the president of the NOJ offers the judge those empty positions at another court of the same level (or maximum one level lower or one level higher) of which the application procedure has not been closed yet. The judge can choose from these positions within eight workdays. If there is no such position to be offered or the judge doesn t choose from them the president of the NOJ transfers the judge to another court of the same level (or maximum one level lower) with a special notice on the behalf of the judge. If the judge is transferred to a lower level court he/she gets the same salary as before and he/she is allowed to use his/her former title. It is possible for the transferred judge to have the judicial review of the transferring decision of the president of the NOJ at the Labour and Administrative Court. Transfer of a judge (2) the court is dismissed the territory of the court is substantially reduced the President of the NOJ offers the judge empty positions at another court of the same level (or maximum one level lower or one level higher) the judge accepts one from the offered the judge doesn t accept any of the offered positions positions or doesn t make a decision within eight workdays the President of the NOJ transfers the judge the President of the NOJ transfers the judge to another court without an application process the court to another court without an application process most be the same level as the former was or maximum one level lower (if the court is lower level, the (if the court is lower level, the judge keeps his/her former salary and title) judge keeps his/her former salary and title) - 9 -

10 Delegation of judges Delegation means that the judge will carry on his/her judicial activity temporary at another court (sometimes this means the judge is working at two courts at the same time of course with an even distribution of workload). A judge can be delegated to another court to guarantee the even distribution of workload between courts or to support the development of his/her professional skills. It always covers a certain period of time, after the delegation period ends the judge will carry on his/her work in his/her former position. It is the authority of the president of the regional court to delegate a judge who is employed at the regional court or at the district courts under that regional court if the delegation is between these district court or between the regional court and the district courts. In any other case, the delegation of the judge is the authority of the president of the NOJ. Without his/her consent a judge only can be delegated for one year within a three year period. There are some judges that cannot be delegated at all to a court away from their residence without their consent (e.g. judges who have a child under the age of three). If the judge gives his/her consent the maximum time of the delegation is not defined. There is a new possibility in the Act: when an application procedure is announced it can be among the conditions that by applying for the position the judge gives his/her consent to a delegation to other (specified) courts. Delegation in the territory of a regional court the judge doesn t give his/her consent the judge gives his/her consent the Judicial Council of the court gives it opinion the president of the regional court decides indeterminate time not possible (e.g. the judge has a child under the age of four) the Judicial Council of the court gives it opinion the President of the NOJ decides for one year within a three year period Delegation between other courts the judge gives his/her consent the Judicial Council of the court gives it opinion the President of the NOJ decides for one year within a three year period the judge doesn t give his/her consent not possible (e.g. the judge has a child under the age of four) the Judicial Council of the court gives it opinion the President of the NOJ decides for one year within a three year period

11 Court Executives Types of the Court Executives President of the Curia (1) Vice President of the Curia (1) Leaders and deputies of the judicial divisions at the Curia (4) Presidents and vice presidents of the regional courts of appeal (10) Presidents and vice presidents of the regional courts (42) Leaders of the judicial divisions at the regional courts of appeal and at the regional court (57) Deputies of the judicial divisions at the regional courts of appeal and at the regional courts (22) Presidents and vice presidents of the district courts (182) Leaders and deputies of the groups at the regional courts of appeal, at the regional courts and the district courts (117) The suitable person is suggested by the President of the Republic. The position must be filled in a publicly announced application procedure. The position must be filled in a publicly announced application procedure. The position must be filled in a publicly announced application procedure. The position must be filled in a publicly announced application procedure. The position must be filled in a publicly announced application procedure. The position must be filled in a publicly announced application procedure. The position must be filled in a publicly announced application procedure. The position must be filled in a publicly announced application procedure. Requirements: - must be a judge appointed for an indeterminate term, - must have at least five years judicial practice. The application shall contain long term plans about the operation of the court. The application shall contain long term plans about the operation of the division. The application shall contain long term plans about the operation of the court. The application shall contain long term plans about the operation of the court. The application shall contain long term plans about the operation of the division. The application shall contain long term plans about the operation of the division. The application shall contain long term plans about the operation of the court. The application shall contain long term plans about the operation of the group. Elected for nine years by the 2/3 majority of the Parliament by a secret ballot. The full session of the Curia forms an opinion by a secret ballot. The full session of the Curia forms an opinion by a secret ballot. The conference of judges at the regional court of appeal forms an opinion by a secret ballot. The conference of judges at the regional court forms an opinion by a secret ballot. The conference of judges at the regional court of appeal / regional court forms an opinion by a secret ballot. The judges of the juducial division form an opinion by a secret ballot. The judges of the district court form an opinion by a secret ballot. The judges of the group form an opinion by a secret ballot. The President of the Republic appoints the elected candidate for nine years. The President of the Republic appoints the successful applicant for six years. The President of the Curia appoints the successful applicant for six years. The President of the NOJ appoints the successful applicant for six years. The President of the NOJ appoints the successful applicant for six years. The President of the NOJ appoints the successful applicant for six years. The President of the regional court of appeal / regional court appoints the successful applicant for six years. The President of theregional court appoints the successful applicant for six years. The President of the regional court of appeal / regional court appoints the successful applicant for six years. Presidents of the panels at the Curia (31) The position must be filled in a publicly announced application procedure. The judges of the juducial division form an opinion by a secret ballot. The President of the Curia appoints the successful applicant for an indeterminate term. Presidents of the panels at the regional courts of appeal and at the regional courts (276) The position must be filled in a publicly announced application procedure. The judges of the juducial division form an opinion by a secret ballot. The President of the regional court of appeal / regional court appoints the successful applicant for an indeterminate term

12 Who appoints the court executives?

13 Court Designation Designating the court for the procedure in order to secure the adjudication of the cases within a reasonable period of time. The procedure can be initiated by: the president of a regional court the president of a regional court of appeal the General Prosecutor It is only possible to initiate the procedure within 15 days from receiving the case. The initiating authority must inform the parties about filing such a motion. The motion for the designation shall contain the reasons why the reasonable-timed adjudication of the case (or of the specific group of cases) may not be secured and it shall list the data on the number of cases, the court staff and other data justifying the extraordinary and disproportionate workload of the court. The president of NOJ examines within 8 days according to the principles defined by the NJC whether the motion is well founded on the basis of the data on the number of cases, the court staff and other data, taking into view the specific features of the case concerned and he/she shall consider the court that can be designated for the procedure. The president of NOJ shall consult the court affected by the designation and in a criminal case if the initiator is not the General Prosecutor the General Prosecutor; furthermore, he/she may ask for data or for opinion from any court; such requests shall be dealt with urgency. The president of NOJ decides about the designation within 8 days from receiving the opinions and data either by rejecting any unfounded motion or by designating another court if the motion is well founded. The president of NOJ may designate another court of the same competence only in exceptional cases instead of the court having jurisdiction over the case and only if the adjudication within a reasonable period of time may not be otherwise secured because of the extraordinary and disproportionate workload of the court concerned. The parties have the possibility to appeal against the designating decision of the president of the NOJ. The appeal shall be submitted within 8 days of the publication of the decision. The Curia judges the appeal within 8 days

14 Statistics The number of judges/panels and the case traffic indicators in the criminal department 2011 The national average of the arrived, finished and pending case according tothe number of judges/panels, without the datas of the Metropolitan Court and the Pest County Court: local level: 14,87/15,49/94,94; Regional Courts first instance: 2,00/2,03/22,33; Regional Courts second instance: 27,93/26,78/150,70 Court level Metropolitan Court Pest Fejér Heves Nógrád the number of judges District Courts traffic case indicators the number of panels Regional Courts, second instance traffic case indicators Regional Courts, first instance the number of judges traffic case indicators Court level GyMS KE Vas Veszprém Tolna the number of judges District Courts traffic case indicators the number of panels Regional Courts, second instance traffic case indicators Regional Courts, first instance the number of judges traffic case indicators Court level HB JNSz SzSzB BAZ Baranya the number of judges District Courts traffic case indicators the number of panels Regional Courts, second instance traffic case indicators Regional Courts, first instance the number of judges traffic case indicators Court level BK Csongrád Békés Zala Somogy the number of judges District Courts traffic case indicators the number of panels Regional Courts, second instance traffic case indicators Regional Courts, first instance the number of judges traffic case indicators "Over the average": national average +20 % "Below the average": national average -20 %

15 The number of judges/panels and the case traffic indicators in the civil department 2011 The national average of the arrived, finished and pending case according tothe number of judges/panels, without the datas of the Metropolitan Court and the Pest County Court: local level: 24,12/24,48/112,28; Regional Courts first instance: 14,58/14,90/83,45; Regional Courts second instance: 32,26/32,30/78,31 Court level Metropolitan Court Pest Fejér Heves Nógrád the number of judges District Courts traffic case indicators the number of panels Regional Courts, second instance traffic case indicators Regional Courts, first instance the number of judges traffic case indicators Court level GyMS KE Vas Veszprém Tolna the number of judges District Courts traffic case indicators the number of panels Regional Courts, second instance traffic case indicators Regional Courts, first instance the number of judges traffic case indicators Court level HB JNSz SzSzB BAZ Baranya the number of judges District Courts traffic case indicators the number of panels Regional Courts, second instance traffic case indicators Regional Courts, first instance the number of judges traffic case indicators Court level BK Csongrád Békés Zala Somogy the number of judges District Courts traffic case indicators the number of panels Regional Courts, second instance traffic case indicators Regional Courts, first instance the number of judges traffic case indicators "Over the average": national average +20 % "Below the average": national average -20 %

16 The Authorities And Election Of The National Judicial Council (NJC) The NJC The NJC is the supervisory body of the central administration of courts. The NJC consists of 15 members. The members are the president of Curia and 14 judges. The 14 judge-members of NJC are elected by the electoral college of judges from among the electors by way of secret ballot with the majority of votes. The NJC is headed and represented by the chairman. The position of the chairman of NJC is vested on the members in rotation on a half year basis, starting with the judge with the longest period spent in service status as a judge. The session of NJC is open to judges, with the exception of the cases when the NJC orders the holding of a closed session. In addition to the members of NJC, the following persons shall participate at the sessions of NJC (without the right to vote, just with the right of consultation): the President of the NOJ, the Minister of Justice, the General Prosecutor, the President of the Hungarian Bar Association, the President of the Hungarian Notary Publics Association, the expert of the case invited by any the President of the NJC, and the representatives NGO s invited by the President of the NJC Main authorities Supervising the central administrative activity of the president of NOJ, and making a notification as necessary Making a proposal to the president of NOJ on initiating legislation affecting the courts Forming an opinion on the regulations and recommendations issued by the president of NOJ Forming an opinion on the proposal on the budget of the heading and on the report on the implementation of the budget Forming an opinion on the detailed conditions and the amount of other benefits In exceptionally justified circumstances, orders the expedited handling of those cases that affect a wide scope of the society, or that are of primary importance in public interest Defines the principles of the procedure of the designation of a court for the procedure in order to secure the adjudication of the cases within a reasonable period of time Publishing annually its opinion on the relevant practice of the president of NOJ and of the Curia regarding the assessment of the applications for judiciary posts, and court executive positions Awarding honorary titles etc., on the initiative of the president of NOJ Performing checks related to the property declarations of judges Deciding on the repeated appointment of certain executives, if the office has already been filled by the applicant two times Forming an advance opinion on the application for an executive post, if the president of NOJ or the Curia would like to defer from the majority opinion of the body that has formed an opinion on the appointment Forming an opinion on the rules pertaining to the training system of judges and to the performance of the training obligation. The member of NJC may observe the documents related to the operation of NOJ and the president of NOJ, and may request data and information from the president of NOJ The deprival of office of the president of NOJ may be initiated by NJC Forms an opinion about the candidates for the presidency of the NOJ and the presidency of the Curia after a personal hearing Defines those principles for the presidents of the NOJ and the Curia that should be taken into consideration if the president wants to suggest the 2nd or the 3rd in order for a judges position Confirms the decision of the President of the NOJ or the President of the Curia if the president wants to suggest the 2nd or the 3rd in order for a judges position Confirms the appointment of those court executives who have not received the approval of the

17 opinion giving body Appoints the president and the members of the Service Court Election of the members of the NJC Judges with at least 5 years of judiciary practice may be elected to be members of NJC. The electoral college entitled to elect the members of NJC shall elect as the judge-member of NJC 1 judge of the regional courts of appeal, 5 judges from the regional courts, 7 judges from the district courts and 1 judge from the administrative and labour court The electors for the electoral college shall be elected by the full session of the Curia, and at the conference of judges on the regional courts of appeal and on the regional courts by the majority of votes of the attending persons. Any judge may propose persons as electors. The status of the election procedure The first election procedure is going on right now: the members of the electoral college have been elected and their assembly will be held on the 29th of February 2012 where the members of the NJC will be elected. The NJC can start it s work after the 15th of March Information On The Practice Of The President Of The National Office For The Judiciary Concerning The Designation Of The Court In Charge In The Year 2012 As the president of the National Office for the Judiciary (hereinafter NOJ) I present the following information on the designation of the court in charge (hereinafter: transfer of cases ) in the year To understand the institution of the transfer of cases it is absolutely necessary to overview the process of introducing this institution in the legal system of Hungary, as well as the demonstration of the changes in the regulations both in the respect of the legislation and on the level of normative orders, the examination of the relevant decisions of the Constitutional Court, and the 2011 year s practice of transferring cases by the Office of the National Council of Justice (hereinafter: ONCJ). 1. Introduction of the transfer of cases in the Hungarian legal regulations It is well known therefore it requires no detailed explanation in this information that the division of workload between the courts of Hungary is very imbalanced and it has its consequences on their everyday adjudication work, too. The problem has been present since long time and the legislation made an attempt to react upon this phenomenon by introducing the possibility of the transfer of cases a practice presently used in certain European countries. The reason of introducing this solution is that the differences of workload between the courts can basically be mitigated in the short term by two ways: by redirecting cases to less loaded courts, and by redirecting judges from the less loaded courts to the courts with more cases. As the rules of judicial independence applicable to the procedures of posting and transferring judges make it difficult to manage the problem adequately the later way, the legislator tried to find a solution by regulating the transfer of cases. It should be noted, however, that by creating the status of so called moving judges (Section 33 of the Act on the status of judges), the legislator has already taken some steps towards the other direction as well. The institution of the transfer of cases was introduced in the Hungarian legal system on 7 January 2011 by the Act CLXXXIII of 2010 on the amendment of certain Acts for the purpose of facilitating the effective operation of the courts and the expediting of court procedures. The National Council of Justice (hereinafter: NCJ) had discussed on its session of 7 December 2010 the draft Bill No. T/1864 its original version not containing the transfer of cases then, with account to the results of the meeting, an amendment proposal was submitted on 14 December 2010 under No. T/1864/41 containing this legal institution. According to the reasoning of this amendment proposal:

18 The Bill introduces a special rule of designation to eliminate the temporal overload of certain courts. It allows designating another court instead of the originally competent one. The regulations have been placed partly in the procedural laws in the Acts on civil and criminal procedure while other parts of the regulation can be found among the duties of Supreme Court and the president of NCJ as contained in the Act on the organisation of courts. The system of competences is a cornerstone of the procedural laws, however, there is another, even more important requirement: to complete the procedure within a reasonable period of time, and the proposal serves this purpose. It is important to stress that it is a crisis management tool to be applied in exceptional circumstance as guaranteed by several guarantees that set a reasonable limit for the designation (the scope of the initiating persons, the deadline, the preparation of the decision, the strict preconditions of the designation etc.). In the course of forming an opinion about the draft legislation, in the document under file No. 3072/2010/5. OIT Hiv., the Office of NCJ upon consultation with the president of NCJ, and in line with its earlier position supported the introduction of this legal institution, although it criticised some elements of the planned amendment (e.g. the possibility to transfer cases in the competence of local courts). In this respect it is important to emphasize that that the Bill had been discussed several times by the Parliament s Constitutional, Justice and Standing Orders Commission prior to submitting it to the plenary assembly of the Parliament. According to the minutes of the meetings, the Commission discussed the above draft amendment in details on 15 December 2010, and the members of the commission did not raise any concern about the regulation on the transfer of cases, there were no remarks on the reasoning of the draft, and the Commission supported the proposal. Subsequently the Parliament adopted the Act on 23 December 2010 with 258 for votes, 16 against votes and with 96 abstentions. The general reasoning of the Act CLXXXIII of 2010 gives the following explanation on the introduction of the legal institution of the transfer of cases: One of the most important expectations towards the judiciary as a service according to the domestic and the international norms, and also in order to maintain the continuous and foreseeable functioning of the society and the economy, is that the litigations of the persons and the companies based on the same legal ground should result in the same judgements anywhere in the country, and such judgements should be passed within almost the same reasonable period of time. If the courts fail to meet this condition, the public opinion on the whole of the judiciary is affected negatively. Based on this Act, the Act LXVI of 1997 on the organisation and the administration of courts (hereinafter: old AOAC), the Act III of 1952 on the Civil Procedure (hereinafter: ACiP) and the Act XIX of 1998 on the Criminal Procedure (ACrP) were amended. The amended provisions were the following: Old AOAC: Section 25 d): The Supreme Court shall delegate cases to specific courts so as to eliminate any irregular and disproportionate workloads, with a view to facilitating maximum efficiency in terms of hearing cases within a reasonable timeframe. Section 33/A (1) The Supreme Court shall have powers to reassign - in exceptional cases on a recommendation by the President of NCJ - certain cases from the court of original jurisdiction to another court of analogous jurisdiction, if providing a reasonable timeframe for hearing the case or a group of specific cases assigned to the court cannot be ensured otherwise due to the irregular and disproportionate workload of the court, and if having additional cases assigned will not burden the court affected beyond reason. (2) The president judges of high courts of appeal and county courts may request the President of NCJ within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the case to initiate the reassignment of the case. The President of NCJ, if in agreement with the request, shall make the recommendation to the Supreme Court within fifteen days

19 (3) The recommendation for reassignment shall specify the reasons on account of which hearing the case, or a group of specific cases assigned to the court during the period specified in Subsection (2) cannot be ensured within a reasonable timeframe, and shall provide details relating to workload, personnel and other information underlying the irregular and disproportionate workload of the court affected. The President of NCJ, before making the recommendation, shall consult with the court affected and - in connection with criminal cases - the Chief Prosecutor, and may request data and information from the Office of NCJ and any court; such requests must be satisfied without delay. (4) The Supreme Court shall decide on the assignment within eight days, without a formal hearing; such decisions may not be appealed. (5) The Supreme Court - before rendering a decision - may request the President of NCJ to supply additional information and assessments, and may take the measures specified in Subsection (3). The Supreme Court shall not be bound by the recommendation and the assessments supplied in rendering a decision, and may assign the cases specified in the recommendation to a court other than one requested; the opinion of this other court shall be obtained before rendering the decision. (6) If the assignment concerns a criminal case, the Supreme Court shall inform the Chief Prosecutor of its decision concerning the assignment. (7) A case assigned under this Section may not be further reassigned. ACrP: Section 20/A The Supreme Court shall have powers to reassign - on a recommendation by the President of the National Council of Justice of Hungary - certain cases from the court of original jurisdiction to another court of analogous jurisdiction, if providing a reasonable timeframe for hearing the case or a group of specific cases assigned to the court cannot be ensured otherwise due to the irregular and disproportionate workload of the court, and if having additional cases assigned will not burden the court affected beyond reason. ACiP: Section 47 (1) The Supreme Court shall have powers to reassign - on a recommendation by the President of the National Council of Justice of Hungary - certain cases from the court of original jurisdiction to another court of analogous jurisdiction, if providing a reasonable timeframe for hearing the case or a group of specific cases assigned to the court cannot be ensured otherwise due to the irregular and disproportionate workload of the court, and if having additional cases assigned will not burden the court affected beyond reason. (2) Reassignment under this Section may be authorized in non-judicial proceedings governed by specific other legislation only if so prescribed by the relevant legislation. 2. The applicaton of the transfer of cases in 2011 It is important to note that in 2011 in addition to the above mentioned laws there were no further regulations on constitutional or lower levels about the transfer of cases. Neither NCJ, the president of it, nor the Office of NCJ adopted any detailed regulations in this respect. Still in the year 2011 there were 13 transfers of cases as follows: Initiator Number and type of cases Result of the procedure 1 criminal case Designation of the Debrecen Regional Court of Appeal Designations of Zala County Court (6), Békés 12 financial cases County Court (3), Baranya County Court (1), Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok County Court (1), Nógrád County Court (1) Budapest-Capital Regional Court Budapest-Capital Regional Court Budapest-Capital Regional Court 4 criminal cases The president of NCJ did not submit a motion for designation (designation of another court is not justified)

20 In practice the procedures were implemented the following way: after receiving the motion from the court president, the Statistical of the Office of NCJ had prepared a summary on the national data of the turnover of cases, then the leader of the Office of NCJ contacted the presidents of the 3-4 courts with the best turnover data, asking them to reply on the basis of the statement of claim or the indictment if they are ready to be designated. Based on the positive replies from the courts, the president of NCJ proposed the designation of one of the courts. The Supreme Court s decision was, in every case, the same as proposed by the president of NCJ. In this regard it is important point out that in the period concerned, the president of the Supreme Court was at the same time the president of NCJ as well. The process of transferring cases in 2011: The president of the initiating court files a motion for the designation President of NCJ (Office of the NCJ) Does not agree with the designation. Agrees with the designation The Supreme Court decides Contacting the presidents of the potential courts for designation Obtaining the opinion of the Chief Prosecutor (in a criminal case) In the case of the rejected cases, although in each case there were at least three county courts that could have judge upon the case within a reasonable period of time (based on their case-turnover data), but none of the three contacted court presidents had volunteered to be designated, and therefore the president of NCJ did not proposed the designation of another court. In these cases the president of NCJ requested the Budapest-Capital Regional Court to regroup internal resources to handle the problem (primary by way of including second instance judges into the handling first instance cases). As a summary, regarding the practice of the transfer of cases in 2011, there were 13 transfers in the respective year without any attempt to adopt provisions on regulating the preparation of the decision by the president of the NCJ and the Supreme Court, to provide a detailed implementing regulation of the above Acts of Parliament The results of the cases transferred in 2011 Annex 1 contains the main data related to the cases transferred in The trend visible in 2011 continued in the year 2012: with the exception of a single case, the initiator of transfers was the Budapest-Capital Regional Court mainly in financial litigations. The division of the cases transferred (13) in 2011 based on the type of the case: Economic c as e Criminal cas e

21 However, most of the transferred cases have not qualified as priority cases according to Chapter XXVIII/A of the ACrP, or a litigation of primary importance according to Chapter XXVI of ACiP (hereinafter: priority case ). One of the reasons of it was that the category of priority cases was only introduced by the legislation on 13 July The share of priority cases from the transferred cases (13) in 2011: Priority (4) Non-priority (9) The majority of the cases transferred in 2011 have already been closed, illustrating that the transfer significantly expedited the handling of the cases (the related trends are analysed in more detail in the context of the 2012 s data). The share of closed cases from the transferred cases (13) in 2011: Closed Pending 3. The regulation and the practice of the transfer of cases in 2012 First we should take a look at the legislation amended in this year The regulation in force between 1 January 2012 and 17 July 2012 The Fundamental Law of Hungary was put into force as from 1 January 2012, and it was the date when the National Office for the Judiciary and the National Judicial Council (NJC) started their operation. New legislation was put into effect on the administration and the organisation of courts as well as of the legal status of judges: Act CLXI of 2011 on the administration and the organisation of courts (hereinafter: AOAC), and Act CLXII of 2011 on the legal status and the remuneration of judges (hereinafter: ALSRJ). A totally new level of regulation was also introduced in the respect of regulating the transfer of cases: the transitory provisions of the Fundamental Law (hereinafter: TPFL) contained the relevant rules and some respective Acts of Parliament were also amended: TPFL: - Section 11 (3) In the interest of the enforcement of the fundamental right to a court decision within a reasonable time guaranteed by Article XXVIII(1) of the Fundamental Law, and until a balanced distribution of caseload between the courts has been realised, the President of the National Office for the Judiciary may designate a court other than the court of general competence but with the same jurisdiction to adjudicate any case. - (4) In the interest of the enforcement of the fundamental right to a court decision within a reasonable time guaranteed by Article XXVIII(1) of the Fundamental Law, and until a balanced distribution of

22 caseload between the courts has been realised, the Chief Prosecutor, as the head and director of the prosecution service which operates as a contributor to the administration of justice under Article 29 of the Fundamental Law, may instruct that charges be brought before a court other than the court of general competence but with the same jurisdiction. This provision shall not affect the right of the President of the National Office for the Judiciary guaranteed by paragraph (3), or the right of certain prosecution services to bring charges before any court which operates within their area of competence. AOAC: Section 62 (1) The president of NOJ may, exceptionally, designate another court of the same competence instead of the court having jurisdiction over the case to be judged upon, if the adjudication, within a reasonable period of time, of the case or of the specific group of cases received by the court in a specific period may not be otherwise secured because of the extraordinary and disproportionate workload of the court concerned, and the designation should not pose a disproportionate workload on the designated court. (2) The president of the regional court of appeal or of the regional court, and the chief prosecutor may initiate the designation to the president of NOJ within 15 days upon the receipt of the case. (3) The motion for the designation shall contain the reasons why the adjudication, within a reasonable period of time, of the case or of the specific group of cases received by the court in the period specified in para. (1) may not be secured, and it shall list the data on the number of cases, the court staff and other data justifying the extraordinary and disproportionate workload of the court. Section 63 (1) The president of NOJ shall examine within 8 days upon receiving the motion, whether the motion is well founded on the basis of the data on the number of cases, the court staff and other data, taking into view the specific features of the case concerned, and he/she shall consider the court that can be designated for the procedure. The president of NOJ shall consult the court affected by the designation and, in a criminal case, if the initiator is not the chief prosecutor the chief prosecutor; furthermore, he/she may as for data or for opinion from any court; such requests shall be dealt with urgency. (2) The president of NOJ shall decide about the designation within 8 days upon receiving the opinions and data under para. (1), either by rejecting any unfounded motion or by designating another court if the motion is well founded. (3) The president of NOJ shall notify the initiator and in the case of designating another court the designated court, and, if the designation concerns a criminal case, the chief prosecutor as well. Section 64 In the case subject to designation no further designation can be performed under the rules of this chapter. ACrP: Section 20/A The President of the National Office for the Judiciary shall have powers to reassign certain cases from the court of original jurisdiction to another court of analogous jurisdiction, if providing a reasonable timeframe for hearing the case assigned to the court cannot be ensured otherwise due to the irregular and disproportionate workload of the court, and if having additional cases assigned will not burden the court affected beyond reason. ACiP: Section 47 (1) The President of the National Office for the Judiciary shall have powers to reassign certain cases from the court of original jurisdiction to another court of analogous jurisdiction, if providing a reasonable timeframe for hearing the case or a group of specific cases assigned to the court cannot be ensured otherwise due to the irregular and disproportionate workload of the court, and if having additional cases assigned will not burden the court affected beyond reason. (2) Reassignment under this Section may be authorized in non-judicial proceedings governed by specific other legislation only if so prescribed by the relevant legislation. As a difference compared to the previous regulation, the decision about the designation is made by the president of NOJ and not by the Supreme Court (Curia)