153 KB52 KB201320252020Florjančič, Damijanletnik:46številka:6/7str. 1081-1095ISSN:0353-6521COBISSID_HOST:42561027URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-Z54SESQHslLexperaPodjetje in deloclearance ratečasovni standarddisciplinary proceedingsdisciplinski postopekdisposition timeefficiencyevaluation of the judicial serviceindividualindividualnainstitucionalnainstitutionaljudicial administrationjudicial decision makingobvladovanje pripadaocena sodniške službeodgovornostpričakovani čas rešitveresponsibilitysodna upravasodno odločanjesojenje v razumnem rokutime standardtrial within a reasonable timeučinkovitostO učinkovitosti in odgovornosti v sodstvu|In the first part of the article, the author analyses different aspects of efficiency in the functioning of the judiciary. First the constitutional and legal bases for defining efficiency criteria are presented. Second, based on data from the Annual Report on the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Courts for 2019 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia and data from the 2020 EU Justice Scoreboard, the author presents basic conclusions on the efficiency of the Slovenian judiciary. He estimates that the Slovenian judiciary is relatively efficient and, on average, comparable to most judicial systems in other EU countries. He emphasises the importance of new methodological approaches for monitoring the work and efficiency of the judiciary. In the second part of the article, the author addresses some issues related to the responsibility of the judiciary and in the judiciary. In doing so, he highlights different aspects of responsibility, namely institutional responsibility, at the level of the judiciary as a system, and individual responsibility, at the level of each individual judge. Their intertwining and interdependence is reflected in the fact that, at the institutional level, the judicial administration is established and responsible for ensuring appropriate working conditions for judges; on the other hand, the reflection of the work of each individual judge is reflected at the institutional level, which is ultimately perceived in the appropriate level of trust enjoyed by the judiciary in the public. In order to exercise institutional responsibility, appropriate external decision-making mechanisms have been established - the National Assembly and the Judicial Council; in order to assess the individual responsibility of judges, internal decision-making mechanisms have been established - personnel councils, which assess judicial service of individual judges, and a disciplinary court, which decides on disciplinary violations by judgesAvtor v prvem delu prispevka predstavi poglede na vprašanja učinkovitosti pri delovanju sodstva. Najprej se ustavi pri ustavnih in zakonskih podlagah, pomembnih za opredeljevanje kriterijev učinkovitosti. Zatem, opirajoč se na podatke iz Letnega poročila o učinkovitosti in uspešnosti sodišč 2019 Vrhovnega sodišča RS in na podatke iz The 2020 EU Justice Scoreboard, prikaže temeljne zaključke o učinkovitosti poslovanja slovenskega sodstva. Oceni, da je slovensko sodstvo razmeroma učinkovito in v povprečju primerljivo z večino sodnih sistemov drugih držav v EU. Ob tem opozori na pomen novih metodoloških pristopov za spremljanje dela in učinkovitosti sodstva. V drugem delu se dotakne nekaterih vprašanj v zvezi z odgovornostjo sodstva in v sodstvu. Pri tem navede dva vidika odgovornosti, in sicer institucionalno, na ravni sodstva kot sistema, in individualno, ki se izkazuje pri vsakem posameznem sodniku. Njuna medsebojna prepletenost in odvisnost se kaže v tem, da je na institucionalni ravni sodna uprava vzpostavljena in odgovorna za zagotavljanje ustreznih pogojev dela sodnikov; po drugi strani delo vsakega posameznega sodnika odseva na institucionalni ravni, kar se končno zaznava v ustrezni stopnji zaupanja, ki jo v javnosti uživa sodstvo. Za uveljavljanje institucionalne odgovornosti so vzpostavljeni predvsem ustrezni zunanji mehanizmi odločanja - Državni zbor in Sodni svet; za presojanje individualne odgovornosti sodnikov pa predvsem notranji mehanizmi odločanja - personalni sveti, ki sprejemajo ocene sodniške službe, in disciplinsko sodišče, ki odloča o disciplinskih kršitvah sodnikovTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of Slovenia