MODEL OF COMPETENCIES

Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

1.Education in Law

• University Diploma

Master’s or other equivalent degree. All analyzed countries.

The requested degree of education depends on the education system of a particular country and the possibilities (requirements of entry) to schools for the judiciary, where they exist (e.g. Poland, Germany, France, Spain). A requirement to study at the judicial school varies depending on the system (may be either before or after becoming a judicial candidate).
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

2. Nationality

• Passport (other ID documents)

All analyzed countries.

To achieve diversity not to discriminate, second citizenship should not be regarded as a possible restriction.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

3. Work experience

• CV
• References from employers
  • A prescribed period of legal experience: Netherlands (2 years of prior legal experience is required); Lithuania (5 years of legal experience required). Professional legal experience – experience in a legal position gained after gaining a law degree.
  • Possibility to take into account longer periods of legal experience (e.g., to add some points to the applicant). Netherlands: the duration of the training period for becoming a judge is also based on the previous work experience, candidate’s training needs and the needs of the court); candidates with at least 6 years of professional experience (at least 2 years outside the judiciary) have an abbreviated training period – at least 15 months, candidates with 2-6 years of professional legal experience have a training period for up to 4 years.
  • Possibility to relieve the candidate from certain parts of selection procedure, for example, examination (testing professional knowledge) or to allow for a shorter training time periods. Slovakia: passing a professional judicial examination may be waived for prominent scientists, who are have 10 years or more experience in the legal profession.
  • Different legal experiences may be taken into account. Germany: 2-years period in various fields of law is a part of legal studies. Legal experience outside the judiciary, may, for example include: practising as a lawyer, company lawyer, legal aid lawyer or procedural representative; experience as an assistant professor of law or lecturer in law; legal work experience at the ECHR and (or) the CJEU; practical experience as a public prosecutor or advocate general at the Public Prosecution Service.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

4. Age

• Passport (other ID documents)

No age limits (Great Britain, Sweden, Romania)

Lower age limit of at least 30-33 (Czech Rep. (30)

Upper age limit (Should not be set).

Age should reflect the requirement of a certain degree of experience. But it should also be taken into account that if a certain period of legal experience is required, an age limit should not be included as a separate requirement since legal experience itself encompasses the requirement of  age.

The judicial profession should be open to the professionals of all ages, thus lawyers with significant legal experience should also be included.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

5. Health

  • physical and mental;
  • including mental diseases, alcohol, or drug abuse or dependence et.
  • Certificate from a medical institution including information on dependence (abuse) of alcohol or addictive substances.
  • Psychological assessment (tests and (or) personal interviews) may take several steps.

Lithuania. Physical and mental condition allowing the candidate to properly  perform the duties of judge (“yes/no”). Health evaluation could/should include review of medical history on diagnosis or inscriptions of dependence (abuse) on alcohol, drug or other addictive substances.

Physical fitness or physical endurance should not be tested specifically and should not go beyond what is necessary to perform judicial functions.

Dependence on alcohol, drugs or other addictive substances or their abuse should be further specifically examined only if suspected (indicated) . In such instances a professional individual assessment should be possible.

Psychological assessment and personal interview should be a part of the selection procedure for selection of suitable candidates (before training), but certain psychological characteristics can be assessed after a particular period of training.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

6.Standard of high moral character
  • Information from relevant authorities
  • Certificate that a candidate is not convicted of a crime or criminal offence.

Min threshold (compliance/non-compliance): Netherlands, Lithuania, Slovakia, etc.

In the Netherlands someone who has committed a criminal offence is not eligible for a position as a judicial official (in training). That is why an extract from the Judicial Documentation Register is also requested. An exception can be made if – in the light of all circumstances – there is a fact of (very) minor seriousness and/or long-term passage of time and it cannot reasonably be said (anymore) that there is damage to the reputation of the judicial office.

Concept of integrity should be regarded as an obligatory precondition and not a competence, which may be graded or evaluated in scores (Ukraine).
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

7. Impeccable reputation
  • No removal from public office

Lithuania: not to be removed from the public office of a judge, a prosecutor, a lawyer, a notary, a bailiff, a police officer, or an employee of the system of the interior or from the public service for a violation of professional ethics or malfeasance and if less than five years have lapsed after such removal (dismissal).
  • References and (or) information from previous legal employment

Netherlands: 2 structured form references (filing out a form).

Questions answered by the referees:

  1. What is/was your relationship to the candidate?
  2. How frequent are/were your contacts with the candidate?
  3. To what extent does the candidate meet/satisfy in his/her current/past career?
  4. How did his/her career develop?
  5. What is your opinion in relation to the candidate on the following points? • analytical, problem-solving and creativity; • legal knowledge/experience; • integrity; • expressiveness; both orally and in writing; • social, communicative, and collegial qualities (making contact, dealing with colleagues, employees, managers, acting outwardly towards clients/audience); • decisiveness; • personal predominance/authority; • performance: quantitative and qualitative.
  6. On what points do you think the candidate can develop further?
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

8. Other requirements of the judicial code of conduct
  • Property statement
  • Written statement of the candidate
  • Slovakia: a written statement where he specifies the list of affiliated persons, who are judges, employees of courts, the Ministry of Justice, including institutions under the Ministry, or members of the Judicial Selection Commission (name, surname, functional position, and denomination of the organization).
  • Candidate is obliged to submit his/her property statement.
  • All applications, including professional curriculum vitae and motivation letters, should be published on the internet that every person could inform themselves and raise doubts as to the suitability of candidates when appropriate.
  • This should be made after preliminary assessment of applicants so the first assessment of motivation letters could be made anonymously – to ensure the non-discrimination).

• Integrity check:
– assets;
– relations (connections).
  • Self-declaration form;
  • Questionnaire filled out by the candidate;
  • Data from tax and customs authorities.
  • Information on any possible disciplinary labour actions;
  • Interview with a separate body, composed from members of the public.
  • Legitimity may be proved (the assets are in line with the candidate’s income);
  • Correctness of the information provided in the self-declaration form.
  • Opinion of a separate body (members of society): Ukraine, Albania.

The experts tend to agree that albeit the necessity of this requirement depends on the situation of judiciary in a particular country, all methods beyond the self declaration form should be used with caution and to not go beyond what is necessary (or a standard routine procedure) in a given case.

A candidate, however, should not be allowed to proceed, if such a check reveals relations or contacts with members from organized crime, ties with intelligence agencies or similar information, which would put the candidate’s integrity in jeopardy (question).
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

9. Relevant activities and experiences of the applicant in field of law

(scholarly work, teaching, studying, international projects, research)

Doctoral degree

Another focus of study
  • CV
  • Diplomas
  • List of relevant publications

Can be taken into account (to award candidate additional points). Lithuania: Taking into account the significance of the work included in the legal work experience in forming the skills necessary for the work of a district court judge, the nature and quality of the candidates’ legal or scientific-pedagogical work is assessed up to 20 points. For legal practitioners the rules do not give a detailed guidance on how the nature and quality of legal practitioner’s work should be evaluated. However, the rules are more detailed for scholar candidates as they state, that a doctor of social sciences – for the position of a judge of a district court is assessed taking into account the field of personal research (interests), nature of legal, scientific-pedagogical work, participation in scientific activities after obtaining a scientific degree, number of scientific articles in peer – reviewed scientific publications, participation in research, etc.), university results, certification results, pedagogical workload (number of lectures, supervision of students’ research and final theses, dissertation opposition, participation in doctoral committees, review of final theses, etc.)
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

1. Good general legal knowledge and awareness of current policy issues and/or

legal knowledge after training:

  • Detailed legal knowledge
  • Knowledge of procedural law
  • Ability to interpret and apply legislation in practice
  • Ability to structure a decision (task/work) using case law and literature
  • Ability to perceive facts and distinguish the essential from the insignificant
  • Judicial school graduation
  • Legal written tests and case studies/decision writing
  • Interviews
  • Possession of basic knowledge (review knowledge of the main disciplines, court system of the country).
  • Publication of test questions and other texts of judicial examinations on the Internet.
  • It´s not necessary to test legal knowledge after training, professional skills are more important.
  • Czech Republic: expertise in substantive and procedural law is tested by a judicial examination, a bar examination, a notary or bailiff examination.
  • Netherlands: legal knowledge is a prerequisite, but not a decisive factor in its own right. The development of competences such as collaboration, communication, decisiveness is also an important part of the training. The development of competencies is often best done in a group. Collaboration with other judges is an integral part of the training.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

2. Reasoning and persuasion skills:

– persuasiveness;

– ability to express oneself;

– oral expression.
  • Practical exercise (writing a judgment)
  • Role play
  • Interview 

Assessment before and during the selection period.

In Latvia – it is evaluated if a candidate:

– is able to formulate an opinion clearly and comprehensibly;

– is able to explain complex issues in an understandable manner;

– is able to argue logically and methodologically correctly;

– is able to substantiate the opinion in detail, individually and concretely;

– is able to avoid excessive scientific terminology;

– can subsume accurately;

– is open to differences of opinion;

– is able to form a constructive discussion.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

3. Ability to decide (decisiveness)

Practise of deciding on a case
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

4. Independence/ Impartiality

(Position understanding)
  • Interviews
  • Practical exercise

Netherlands

Latvia

Germany.

Position understanding (Latvia):

  • the ability to be objective regardless of the individual circumstances;
  • ability to distance oneself, to be reserved (to draw objective conclusions);
  • the ability to be aware of and test the possibility of one’s own prejudices;
  • the ability to avoid influence and opportunities for influence;
  • understanding of the impact of private transactions on the position;
  • civic courage;
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

5. Ability to conduct self-directed learning
  • Certificates from training courses

Latvia, Germany:

  • Ability to acquaint oneself with new legal fields.
  • Knowledge of legal novelties, changes in the legal regulation in relevant field or court system.
  • Minimal number of courses (hours) taken per year.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

6. Understanding of interdisciplinary relationships

• Interview

Latvia: understanding of social, economic, technical development, political context.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

7. IT skills
  • CV
  • Certificate

Latvia, Germany:

  • At least at the level of an experienced everyday user.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

8. Case preparation and process management skills
  • After training

Latvia, Germany.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

1. Motivation

  • to pursue the profession;
  • to learn new things;
  • to work on one’s own abilities and skills.
  • Motivation letters (before training)
  • Interviews (before and during training -communication)
  • Informal communication during training

Netherlands: the assessment of initial motivation letters of applicants should be made in an anonymous (blinded) way – to keep non – discriminating approach to all the applicants. At the first evaluation of motivation letters, the assessors should not know the age and the sex of the applicant, to allow them to concentrate on the motivation of the applicant and the facts of previous legal practise and other experiences in the field of law. Certain other information may also be taken into account, e. g. whether a candidate does not entertain some political ambitions (judge independence) and others.

The trainers are helpful, open to discussions, they often (every three months) give the feedback to the trainee judges, they give them the space to make their own decisions and generally grow professionally. One learns best by doing it oneself in practice. A stimulating, safe environment is offered in which the practice supervisor/trainer and other experienced colleagues offer support and help to recognize learning situations. They stimulate continuous reflection and offer space to experiment with new behaviour. The trainer is not the assessor. The trainer has the role of a supervisor, coach, and source of information. This gives the new colleague room to raise all questions or dilemmas. The judge in training is seen as someone, who brings his own unique talents and already knows and can do a lot. Experienced colleagues lead by example by bringing up the dilemmas they are struggling with, what they found difficult when they started and how they subsequently solved them. In this way, the training leads to fruitful exchange back and forth.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

2. Self-confidence
  • Personality questionnaires and other psychological tests;
  • Role playing;
  • „Working tests“.

Required minimal score

Czech Republic

Estonia

Germany

Latvia

Lithuania

Slovak Republic             

Netherlands
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

3. Analytical thinking

  • Psychologic tests
  • Interviews
  • Practical exercise

Netherlands

High threshold should be required.

Tests can be passed on internet sites (first level)
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

4. Logical thinking
  • IQ test
  • Other psychological tests

Netherlands.

Success threshold (points) of psychological tests on analytical and logical thinking and on IQ, must be determined by psychologists, but a high level threshold should be required. Tests may be passed on internet sites (first level). For applicants who failed these tests, the rest of the procedure should be closed. (The applicants can repeatedly undergo this procedure after a certain time (e.g., three years ) if they fail.)
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries
  1. Emotional stability, stress tolerance and stress management skills/ psychological fitness
  • Psychological tests
  • Interviews
  • Practical exercises
  • Role playing

The stress management skills should be evaluated after training.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

6. Oral expression
• Interviews

Lithuania. Oral part of the selection procedure should also be recorded using the technical equipment with good sound recording possibilities.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

7. Sense of duty and responsibility
  • Interviews
  • Practical exercise
  • (Evaluation during or after training)

Latvia, Germany:

  • is aware of ones responsibility to society and is aware that he/she is a role model for society;
  • takes responsibility for the administration of justice;
  • is able to evaluate the consequences of his decisions;
  • does the work carefully;
  • is open to communication within the competence;
  • makes efficient use of the resources at its disposal.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries
8. Ability to cope with the workload
  • Interviews
  • Practical exercise
  • (Evaluation during or after training)

Latvia, Germany:

  • psychological fitness;
  • prepared to take on additional responsibilities;
  • able to work fast under pressure and be precise;
  • maintains high standards even with a large workload.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries
9. Ability to manage and to organise work
  • Psychological tests
  • Interviews
  • (Evaluation during or after training)

Latvia, Germany:

  • Sets priorities
  • Optimises workflow
  • Can motivate oneself and others
  • Delegates work reasonable
  • Takes available resources into account
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

10. Flexibility/openness and readiness for innovations
  • Psychological tests
  • Interviews
  • (Evaluation during or after training)

Latvia, Germany:

  • openness towards new technologies;
  • openness towards modernisation of courts;
  • prepared to work in different court structures;
  • ability to develop new solutions. 
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

11. Curiosity to learn

  • Certificates or other proof of learning
  • A number of hours (courses) taken.
  • Is keen to gain knowledge in new and developing spheres of law, but also to develop one’s personality in spheres relevant to the profession, e. g. proficiency in languages.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

12. Awareness of personal strengths and weaknesses/ Personality maturity
  • Interview
  • Personality questionnaires and other psychological tests
  • Role playing
  • „Working tests“
  • Package of different evaluation methods
  • Evaluation in an assessment centre

Required minimal score
Czech Republic
Estonia
Germany
Latvia
Lithuania
Slovak Republic
Netherlands
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

13. Ability of creative thinking

Honesty

Trustworthiness
  • Interview
  • Personality questionnaires and other psychological tests
  • Package of different evaluation methods
  • Evaluation in an assessment centre

Required minimal score

Czech Republic

Estonia

Germany

Latvia

Lithuania

Slovak Republic             

Netherlands

Different countries include a varying amount of competencies and skills, sometimes they show more or less resemblance, sometimes they lack an obvious scheme or basis.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries
  1. General social competences
  • Psychological tests
  • Interviews
  • (Several steps of evaluation)
  • Personality questionnaires and other psychological tests
  • Role play
  • Evaluation in an assessment centre
  • Openness toward lay judges and court staff.
  • Is aware of his/her responsibility to society and is aware that there is a role model for society.
  • Ability of interpersonal communication, tolerance and assertiveness towards parties of the process (ability to react to their different expressions).
  • Ability to respect collegiality towards other professions of law (in particular prosecutors and lawyers).
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

2. Awareness of the environment
  • Interview
  • Assessment centre

Netherlands: Awareness of the environment means that a candidate observes social developments and forms his/her own understanding relevant in the context of judicial activities; seeks familiar, new and contradictory information and diverse perspectives that may influence decision and process of deciding; is aware of the influence of differences and the background of the parties.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

3. Communication skills

Ability to listen to others
  • Interview
  • Role-playing
  • Personality questionnaires
  • Evaluation during or after training

Required minimal score

Latvia

Germany

Netherlands

  • actively listens and allows others to express their opinions;
  • is clear and understandable;
  • argues objectively and bases arguments on facts;
  • takes decisions openly;
  • is able to accurately identify problems and offer a solution;
  • promotes the exchange of experience;
  • is open to business communication;
  • establishes and maintains business contacts.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

4. Conflict resolution

Evaluation during or after training

Required minimal score

Latvia

Germany

  • expresses dissenting views and criticizes other opinions in a constructive manner;
  • finds out the causes of the conflict;
  • considers the arguments of others and is willing to compromise;
  • promotes understanding and reconciliation;
  • behaves honestly and collegially and demands the same from others;
  • does not avoid the necessary decisions;
  • takes a clear position.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

5. Service orientation
  • Evaluation during or after training
  • CV
  • Motivation letters

Previous work of an applicant for the benefit society (volunteer work). Latvia

Germany

Netherlands

  • is friendly and kind, follows the agreements;
  • devotes time to the conversation participants;
  • is empathetic;
  • is able to maintain peace and balance in stressful situations, as well as to create a peaceful atmosphere;
  • is tolerant and patient
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

6. Team management/leadership
  • Evaluation during or after training
  • Interview
  • Personality questionnaires and other psychological tests
  • Role play
  • „Working tests“
  • Package of different evaluation methods
  • Evaluation in an assessment centre

Required minimal score

Czech Republic

Estonia

Germany

Latvia

Lithuania

Slovak Republic             

Netherlands

Ukraine

Different countries include varying amount of competencies and skills, although there is certain resemblance, no obvious common scheme may be detected for this competence. An exemplary list of monitored competences may be the following (a candidate):

  • calls for involvement;
  • is able to provide feedback on work results;
  • delegates and gives clear tasks;
  • creates a positive work climate;
  • takes into account the interests of other employees.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

7. Empathy
  • Interview
  • Personality questionnaires and other psychological tests,
  • Role playing
  • „Working tests“
  • Package of different evaluation methods
  • Evaluation in an assessment centre

Required minimal score

Czech Republic

Estonia

Germany

Latvia

Lithuania

Slovak Republic            

Netherlands

Ukraine

Different countries include varying amount of competencies and skills, although there is certain resemblance, no obvious common scheme may be detected for this competence.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

8. Ability to work in a team

  • Interview
  • Personality questionnaires and other psychological tests,
  • Role playing
  • „Working tests“
  • Package of different evaluation methods
  • Evaluation in an assessment centre

Required minimal score

Czech Republic

Estonia

Germany

Latvia

Lithuania

Slovak Republic            

Netherlands

Ukraine

Different countries include varying amount of competencies and skills, although there is certain resemblance, no obvious common scheme may be detected for this competence.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

9. Respectful treatment of others

Politeness
  • Interview
  • Personality questionnaires and other psychological tests,
  • Role playing
  • „Working tests“
  • Package of different evaluation methods
  • Evaluation in an assessment centre

Required minimal score

Czech Republic

Estonia

Germany

Latvia

Lithuania

Slovak Republic            

Netherlands

Ukraine

Different countries include varying amount of competencies and skills, although there is certain resemblance, no obvious common scheme may be detected for this competence.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

10. Ability to mediate
  • Interview
  • Personality questionnaires and other psychological tests,
  • Role playing
  • „Working tests“
  • Package of different evaluation methods
  • Evaluation in an assessment centre

Required minimal score

Czech Republic

Estonia

Germany

Latvia

Lithuania

Slovak Republic            

Netherlands

Ukraine

Different countries include varying amount of competencies and skills, although there is certain resemblance, no obvious common scheme may be detected for this competence.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

1.  Knowledge of the specific field of law and the ability to apply it in practice, including ability to use law interpretation methods, ability to learn new areas of law
  • Peer review of decisions
  • Reasoned opinion of the higher court
  • Responses to questionnaire composed by evaluation body
  • Record of work in the legal area.
  • Testing of legal knowledge of judge in promotion procedure (exam, test, ect.) is not advocated for

The decision may be made based on different sources of data.

Although the use of minimal threshold method is advocated for, grades, expressed in words (satisfactory, good, very good, perfect) are also common and regarded as an appropriate evaluation method, while it is advised to avoid points. Knowledge testing of an acting judge is deemed an unacceptable method.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

2. Reasoning and persuasion skills

 
  • Peer review of decisions
  • Reasoned opinion of the higher court
  • Interview with a candidate conducted by the selection / evaluation body

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points

-To formulate an opinion clearly and comprehensibly;

– to explain complex issues in a clear manner; – to argue logically and to substantiate the opinion in detail;

– to avoid excessive use of scientific language;

 – to make clear conclusions;

– to be open to opposite views and opinions;

– to methodologically correctly form a constructive discussion. 

Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

3.  Understanding of interdisciplinary relationships (e.g. social, economic, technical, political)
  • Interview with the candidate conducted by the evaluation body
  • CV

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

4. Knowledge / improvement of foreign languages
  • CV
  • Certificates

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

5. Belief in the need for constant professional and general improvement; ability to conduct self-directed learning.
  • CV
  • Certificates of courses attended

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

6. Case preparation and process management skills
  • Reasoned opinion of the administration of court
  • Peer review

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points

  • Knows the case materials;
  • is able to structure the case review process;
  • good responsiveness;
  • ability to clearly define boundaries;
  • ability to create a constructive and reliable atmosphere;
  • ability to speak safely and kindly;
  • ability to prevent unreasonable harm;
  • ability to recognize and facilitate situations where reconciliation is possible;
  • ability to control and manage the situation.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

7. Pedagogical activities
  • Proof of delivered lectures and training courses (number of lectures and courses given)

Willingness and ability to share the knowledge gained in judicial activities or ability to combine judicial and pedagogical activities may give additional points to the evaluated judge.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

8. Activeness in other legal activities: participation in drafting laws or reviewing of draft laws, etc.
  • CV
  • Responses of the candidate to questionnaire composed by evaluation body.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

1. Constructiveness of the candidate’s thinking, erudition.
  • Interview with the candidate conducted by the selection / evaluation commission.
  • Assessment conducted by experts (psychologists).
  • Responses to a questionnaire composed by evaluation body.

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

2. Personal maturity (emotional balance, effectiveness and objectivity of decision-making, ability to resist pressure).
  • Interview with the candidate conducted by the selection / evaluation commission.
  • Assessment conducted by experts (psychologists).
  • Responses to a questionnaire composed by evaluation body.

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

3.  Understanding of duty and responsibility.

  • Interview with the candidate conducted by the selection / evaluation commission.
  • Assessment conducted by experts (psychologists).
  • Responses to a questionnaire composed by evaluation body.

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

1. Ability to work in a team / Team leadership competence
  • Interview with the candidate conducted by the selection / evaluation body
  • Assessment conducted by experts (psychologists)

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points

  • Is able to control the emotions of the participants in the conflict, hears and evaluates the arguments of the parties, looks for ways of conflict resolution.
  • Guided by values, does not confuse public and private interests, does not tolerate any form of corruption.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

2. Communication skills
  • Interview with the candidate conducted by the selection / evaluation body
  • Assessment conducted by experts (psychologists)

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points

  • Is able to control the emotions of the participants in the conflict, hears and evaluates the arguments of the parties, looks for ways of conflict resolution.
  • Guided by values, does not confuse public and private interests, does not tolerate any form of corruption.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

3. Conflict resolution and management skills
  • Interview with the candidate conducted by the selection / evaluation body
  • Assessment conducted by experts (psychologists)

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points

  • Is able to control the emotions of the participants in the conflict, hears and evaluates the arguments of the parties, looks for ways of conflict resolution.
  • Guided by values, does not confuse public and private interests, does not tolerate any form of corruption.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

4. Service orientation
  • Interview with the candidate conducted by the selection / evaluation body
  • Assessment conducted by experts (psychologists)

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points

  • Is able to control the emotions of the participants in the conflict, hears and evaluates the arguments of the parties, looks for ways of conflict resolution.
  • Guided by values, does not confuse public and private interests, does not tolerate any form of corruption.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

5. Resistance to corruption

  • Interview with the candidate conducted by the selection / evaluation body
  • Assessment conducted by experts (psychologists)

Minimum threshold

Grades in words

Points

  • Is able to control the emotions of the participants in the conflict, hears and evaluates the arguments of the parties, looks for ways of conflict resolution.
  • Guided by values, does not confuse public and private interests, does not tolerate any form of corruption.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

1. Managerial skills and competences
  • CV
  • Reasoned opinion of the higher court
  • effectively manages available resources;
  • develops and improves processes and procedures within the court;
  • supports employees’ motivation and engagement.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

2. Leads with vision and strategy
  • Structured interview
  • Presentation
  • Sets the organization’s vision supporting core courts system values and mission.
  • Translates organization’s vision into a long-term strategy.
  • Aligns people, resources, processes and structures with the strategy.
  • Anticipates future challenges and opportunities and makes strategic decisions to address them.
  • Communicates the organization’s vision, values and strategy in a way everyone can relate to it.
  • Identifies and builds partnerships across functional and organizational boundaries that add value to the organization.
  • Enables the organization to remain focused on strategic priorities irrespective of internal and external challenges.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

3. Empowers people
  • Structured interview
  • Role play
  • Situational judgment test
  • Builds a strong culture of continuous learning and knowledge sharing.
  • Provides people with an opportunity to develop new skills and accept new responsibilities.
  • Gives people autonomy they need to do their work.
  • Ensures that people have the resources necessary to accomplish a task.
  • Recognizes and rewards employees’ contributions and accomplishments.
  • Implements policies, processes and structures to promote diversity and inclusion.
  • Creates positive work environment.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

4. Accelerates future
  • Structured interview
  • Case study
  • Is curious and open to new ideas.
  • Challenges established organizational attitudes and practices that are ineffective.
  • Identifies the capability needs of the organization in the future.
  • Anticipates and plans changes.
  • Identifies risks and develops sound contingency plans enabling the organization to implement changes successfully.
  • Strives to simplify and accelerate processes using new technologies
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

5. Drives for results (drives execution)
  • Structured interview
  • In tray exercise
  • Transforms strategic priorities into detailed action plans with accountabilities, deliverables and timeframes for each objective.
  • Effectively manages budget, material and human resources to support organizational success.
  • Establishes appropriate metrics (indicators).
  • Monitors and measures the performance and results, and acts accordingly.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

6. Reputation and authority in the judiciary
  • Reasoned opinion of the higher court.
  • Opinion of the court, where the judge seeks managerial position.

Minimum threshold – possible method, but not advocated for in this instance, since the aim in promotion procedures to choose the best possible candidate rather than to select all suitable candidates.

Grades expressed in words;

Points.

Lithuania,

Finland, Slovak Republic, etc.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

7. An understanding of the functioning of the court system
  • Interview with the candidate conducted by the selection / evaluation body;
  • Responses of the candidate to questionnaire composed  by evaluation body.

Minimum threshold – possible method, but not advocated for in this instance, since the aim in promotion procedures to choose the best possible candidate rather than to select all suitable candidates.

Grades expressed in words;

Points.

Lithuania,

Finland, Slovak Republic, etc.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

8. Involvement in the organization of court work
  • CV
  • Reasoned opinion of the higher court
  • Opinion of the court, where the judge seeks managerial position.

Minimum threshold – possible method, but not advocated for in this instance, since the aim in promotion procedures to choose the best possible candidate rather than to select all suitable candidates.

Grades expressed in words;

Points.

Lithuania,

Finland, Slovak Republic, etc.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

9. Participation in judicial self-government institutions, as well as activities outside court work related to raising awareness of court work (giving lectures, preparing publications, etc.).
  • CV

Minimum threshold – possible method, but not advocated for in this instance, since the aim in promotion procedures to choose the best possible candidate rather than to select all suitable candidates.

Grades expressed in words;

Points.

Lithuania,

Finland, Slovak Republic, etc.
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

1. Strength and adequacy of motivation, strength of professional identity, initiative, aspiration to learn and improve
  • Interview with the candidate conducted by the selection / evaluation body

Grades (insufficient, sufficient, high).

  • Personal values are in line with organizational values.
  • Consciously chooses to stay aligned with own values and goals in ambiguous or challenging situations.
  • Takes accountability for own words and actions. 
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

2. Integrity
  • Interview with the candidate conducted by the selection / evaluation body

Grades (insufficient, sufficient, high).

  • Personal values are in line with organizational values.
  • Consciously chooses to stay aligned with own values and goals in ambiguous or challenging situations.
  • Takes accountability for own words and actions. 
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

3. Self-regulation
  • Structured interview
  • Practical exercises;
  • Role playing;
  • „Working tests“
  • Is able to recognize own thoughts and feelings.
  • Is able to calm oneself when feeling stressed, anxious or down.
  • Moves forward toward owns goals regardless of external or internal struggles.
  • Is able to stay healthy and energized for the long-time while maintaining a proper work-life balance.
  • Reflects on own behavior, decision, choices, and learns from experience.
  • Considers challenges as opportunities (is optimistic).
Criteria Methods of evaluation / Sources of information Description of assessment / Examples of countries

4. Strategic thinking
  • Responses of the candidate to questionaire composed by evaluation body
  • Assessment conducted by experts (psychologists)
  • Monitors social change and its impact in the context of the judiciary;
  • Is able to predict future trends and their consequences;
  • Has a good understanding of the mission of the judiciary and clearly communicates it to others.

Promotion to managerial position
(Only additional skills to the explained in evaluation part will be listed)

Please select a section