Judicial Efficiency: Who Measures and HowWhen talking about judicial efficiency, quick sentences and low workload on judges usually come to mind. However, in reality, efficiency is not about speed at any cost. It is about the court's compliance with its main goal: restoring justice. But how to understand if the court is fair? And who should evaluate this? The answers to these questions are the subject of many years of discussions and numerous theories. In this article, we will examine what constitutes judicial efficiency, who measures it, and why there is still no single recipe for achieving it.Components of Efficiency: Speed, Quality, AccessibilityEffective justice is usually described with three words: fast, correct, accessible. Speed means that the process is not artificially delayed and a decision is made in reasonable time. Quality is the legal justification and correspondence to facts. Accessibility means that everyone can turn to the court regardless of financial situation.But these three components often contradict each other. A quick court may be superficial. Accessible - overloaded. Quality - expensive and slow. Therefore, efficiency is not the maximization of each parameter, but their balance. And this balance depends on the legal system, culture, and country's resources.In international practice, such criteria as predictability of decisions, enforceability of sentences, and public trust level are also highlighted. If people do not trust the court, it is inefficient even with the best indicators. Trust is not just a result, it is the foundation of the legitimacy of the judicial power.Who Evaluates Efficiency: Inside and OutsideInternal assessment is carried out by the judicial system itself. Usually, this is statistical indicators: the number of cases considered, average duration of the process, percentage of appeals, the number of overturned decisions. This data is collected by judicial departments and analyzed by the management of the courts. Such an as ... Read more