Romania Judicial Functional Review
This review is one of a series of functional reviews commissioned by the Government of Romania (GOR), funded by the European Union, and carried out by the World Bank. It is an element agreed on by the European Union and the Government as part of th...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Legal and Judicial Sector Assessment |
| Language: | English en_US |
| Published: |
Washington, DC
2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2013/03/20329626/romania-judicial-functional-review http://hdl.handle.net/10986/20808 |
| Summary: | This review is one of a series of
functional reviews commissioned by the Government of Romania
(GOR), funded by the European Union, and carried out by the
World Bank. It is an element agreed on by the European Union
and the Government as part of the post-accession Cooperation
and Verification Mechanism (CVM) established to assess
further need for reform in the judicial system and to
suggest reforms that would ensure Romania's full
integration into the European Union system. The objective of
the review is to analyze the functioning of institutions of
the judicial system in Romania with a view to providing
analytical and advisory input to the Romanian authorities as
they formulate an action program to improve the performance
of the judicial system. The present report covers a large
part of Romania's judicial system, a term used here
with broad scope. In accord with the terms of reference
(appendix one), in addition to the courts, the review covers
the Ministry of Justice, focusing on those functions most
directly related to the judiciary and to the Public Ministry
(PM), the PM itself, and a range of independent legal
professionals whose work complements and in some cases
replaces that of judges and prosecutors. Within the
judiciary, aside from the ordinary courts, the review also
addressed the operations of the Superior Council of
Magistracy, the Judicial Inspectorate, and the High Court of
Cassation and Justice, all of which operate
quasi-independently. They have their own budgets and
administrative structures, although are still governed by
laws on staffing set by Parliament and staffing levels
approved by the cabinet. Within the PM, the team also looked
at the quasi-independent National Anti-Corruption Directorate. |
|---|