Delay reduction in courts of justice – possibilities and challenges of process improvement in professional public organizations

Delays in the justice system have been undermining the functioning and performance of the court system all over the world for decades. Despite the widespread concern about delays, the solutions have not kept up with the growth of the problem. The delay problem existing in the justice courts processes is a good example of the growing need and pressure in professional public organizations to start improving their business process performance.This study analyses the possibilities and challenges of process improvement in professional public organizations. The study is based on experiences gained in two longitudinal action research improvement projects conducted in two separate Finnish law instances; in the Helsinki Court of Appeal and in the Insurance Court. The thesis has two objectives. First objective is to study what kinds of factors in court system operations cause delays and unmanageable backlogs and how to reduce and prevent delays. Based on the lessons learned from the case projects the objective is to give new insights on the critical factors of process improvement conducted in professional public organizations. Four main areas and factors behind the delay problem is identified: 1) goal setting and performance measurement practices, 2) the process control system, 3) production and capacity planning procedures, and 4) process roles and responsibilities. The appropriate improvement solutions include tools to enhance project planning and scheduling and monitoring the agreed time-frames for different phases of the handling process and pending inventory. The study introduces the identified critical factors in different phases of process improvement work carried out in professional public organizations, the ways the critical factors can be incorporated to the different stages of the projects, and discusses the role of external facilitator in assisting process improvement work and in enhancing ownership towards the solutions and improvement. The study highlights the need to concentrate on the critical factors aiming to get the employees to challenge their existing ways of conducting work, analyze their own processes, and create procedures for diffusing the process improvement culture instead of merely concentrating of finding tools, techniques, and solutions appropriate for applications from the manufacturing sector

Victims’ status at international and hybrid criminal courts : victims’ status as witnesses, victim participants/civil parties and reparations claimants

Bestraffning av internationella brott vid internationella och hybrida straffrättsliga domstolar har traditionellt och huvudsakligen grundat sig på principen om retributiv (vedergällande) rättvisa och ackusatorisk process snarare än återuppbyggande rättvisa och en inkvisitorisk modell. Därav har brottsoffrens ställning vid dessa straffrättsliga domstolar begränsat sig till den som innehas av vittnen vid Tribunalen som behandlar brott som begåtts i det forna Jugoslavien (ICTY), Internationella krigsförbrytartribunalen för Rwanda (ICTR) och Specialdomstolen för Sierra Leone (SCSL). Internationella brottmålsdomstolen (ICC), å sin sida, har medfört en viktig förändring gällande brottsoffrens ställning i internationella straffrättsliga fora, vilket innebär att de från att ha betraktats endast i egenskap av vittnen nu även har en rätt att delta och lämna sina synpunkter (i egenskap av brottsofferdeltagare) samt kräva gottgörelse. Denna trend har fortsatt inom området för internationell straffrätt, vilket manifesterats vid hybridtribunaler som tillsatts efter ICC såsom Kambodjadomstolen (ECCC) vid vilken brottsoffer kan agera civilrättsliga parter och Specialdomstolen för Libanon (STL) där brottsoffer kan inneha en deltagande roll. Den föreliggande studien behandlar två huvudsakliga frågeställningar, av vilka den första lyder: Vilken ställning tillskrivs brottsoffren vid internationella domstolar och hybridtribunaler? I detta hänseende argumenterar författaren, sammanfattningsvis, för att brottsoffrens ställning vid internationella straffrättsliga domstolar och hybridtribunaler huvudsakligen tar sig uttryck på tre sätt, d.v.s. som brottsoffer i egenskap av vittnen, som brottsoffer i egenskap av deltagande brottsoffer/civilrättsliga parter samt som brottsoffer som kräver gottgörelse. Den andra frågeställningen för denna studie lyder: På vilket sätt fungerar brottsoffrens ställning som vittnen, brottsofferdeltagande/civilrättsliga parter och gottgörelsekrävande vid internationella och hybrida straffrättsliga domstolar? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kansainvälisten rikosten rankaiseminen kansainvälisissä rikostuomioistuimissa ja hybridituomioistuimissa on perinteisesti enimmäkseen perustunut retributiivisen oikeuden ja akkusatorisen menetelmän soveltamiseen pikemmin kuin restoratiivisen oikeuden ja inkvisitorisen menetelmän soveltamiseen. Niinpä uhrien asema kansainvälisissä rikostuomioistuimissa ja hybridituomioistuimissa on rajoittunut todistajan asemaan entisen Jugoslavian kansainvälisessä sotarikostuomioistuimessa (ICTY), Ruandan kansainvälisessä sotarikostuomioistuimessa (ICTR) ja Sierra Leonen erikoistuomioistuimessa (SCSL). Kansainvälisen rikostuomioistuimen (ICC) perustaminen on kuitenkin merkinnyt tärkeää muutosta uhrien asemaan kansainvälisen rikosoikeuden alalla siten, että kun uhrit aiemmin nähtiin vain todistajina, heillä on nyt myös mahdollisuus tuoda esiin omat näkökantansa (osallistumisoikeus) ja vaatia hyvitystä. Tämä suuntaus on jatkunut kansainvälisen rikosoikeuden alalla ICC:n jälkeen perustetuissa hybridituomioistuimissa, kuten Kambodzhan erityistuomioistuimessa (ECCC), missä uhrit voivat olla asianosaisen asemassa, sekä Libanonin erityistuomioistuimessa (STL), missä uhrit voivat osallistua prosessiin. Tämä tutkimus käsittelee kahta keskeistä kysymystä. Ensinnäkin: Mikä on rikoksen uhrien asema kansainvälisissä rikostuomioistuimissa ja hybridituomioistuimissa? Tutkimuksessa päädytään mm. siihen, että uhrien asema kansainvälisissä rikostuomioistuimissa ja hybridituomioistuimissa voi koostua pääosin kolmesta ulottuvuudesta eli uhrit todistajina, uhrit prosessiin osallistujina/asianosaisina ja uhrit hyvityksen hakijoina. Tutkimuksen toinen keskeinen kysymys on: Miten uhrien asema todistajina, prosessiin osallistujina/ asianosaisina ja hyvityksen hakijoina toimii kansainvälisissä rikostuomioistuimissa ja hybridituomioistuimissa?

Operations management in courts of justice - outlining functions, challenges and development possibilities

Professional services are an increasingly important group of economy and related to them there has been identified a fairly new concept called professional service operations management. However professional service operations management is still quite under-researched area which needs further research especially in specific contexts. This study aims to respond to that need by examining courts as an environment for operations management. As a result there is a preliminary structured description of what operations management is and could be in courts. The study also aims to inspire and tentatively classify possible areas for future research. Courts are examined based on three common perspectives for typical characteristics of professional services which can be identified in literature: the nature of customer role, the nature of professional work and the nature of process and product. The examination is based on research data from several research projects conducted in Finland and other European countries. Based on the examination it can be said that the operational environment of courts is highly complex and demanding because the case as an object of operations management tasks is challenging, the process sets strict requirements to the handling of the cases and the workforce is hard to direct.