The analysis also highlights a problem with “limited access to justice for poorer citizens.”
It shows that in some member states, which are not named, citizens whose income is below the poverty threshold “do not receive any legal aid in some types of disputes.”
These are two of the main findings of the EU’s annual overview of the judiciary in member states.
They are contained in the European Commission’s EU justice scoreboard for 2017, which gives a comparative overview of the efficiency, quality and independence of justice systems in member states.
Its aim, said the Commission at the launch on Monday, is to assist national authorities to improve the effectiveness of their justice systems.
Compared to previous editions, the 2017 scoreboard looks into new aspects of the functioning of justice systems, for example, how easily consumers can access justice and which channels they use to submit complaints against companies.
For the first time, it also shows the length of criminal court proceedings relating to money laundering offences.
Speaking at the launch of the scorecard in Brussels on Monday, Věra Jourová, European justice, consumers and gender equality Commissioner, said, “The fifth edition of the EU justice scoreboard confirms that effective justice systems are essential to build trust in a business and investment-friendly environment in the single market.”
She added, "I encourage member states to ensure that any justice reform respects the rule of law and judicial independence. This is key for citizens and businesses to fully enjoy their rights. An independent and well-functioning justice system is a fundamental pillar of every democracy.”
Use of ICT tools in judicial systems remains limited in some countries, the Commission says.
“While it's widely used for communication between courts and lawyers in half of the member states, the use of ICT for electronic signature is very limited in over half the EU countries,” according to the scorecard.
“New data on how lawyers use ICT when communicating with courts again underlines the importance of electronic communication for well-functioning justice systems,” it states.
There is an “improved or stable” perception of judicial independence among the general public, according to the Commission scorecard.
However, problems persist about judicial independence in some, unnamed, member states, it goes on to say.
“Among the reasons for the perceived lack of independence of courts and judges, the interference or pressure from government and politicians was the most stated reason,” says the Commission.
The 2017 edition presents data on the safeguards in place in the different member states to guarantee the judicial independence of judges.