Note No. 61 March 2001 Building Coalitions for Change: Venezuela Judicial Infrastructure Development Project Social Development Best Practice Elements · Organizational and institutional analysis to ensure intended outcomes · Institutionalized mechanisms for participation and decentralized implementation · Ongoing monitoring and evaluation of social development outcomes by the government and community In the early 1990s, the Government of Venezuela Project Objectives urgently requested assistance from the World Bank to combat corruption, improve the business The objectives of the Judicial Infrastructure project climate, and create a sense of transparency and were to: involvement of civil society in state matters. The country's judicial system was identified as the · Improve efficiency in the allocation of institution in which to begin such reforms, because resources and the social costs of litigation it was widely perceived as lacking credibility and efficiency. · Increase courtroom productivity and efficiency The Judicial Infrastructure Project aimed to · Reduce the private sector costs of dispute improve Venezuela's enabling environment for resolution. private sector development and to reduce the private and social costs of justice. In December Problems in the Judicial Sector 1993, the Bank began negotiations with the government to develop a project that would Corruption among police and judges was seen as a address failings in the judicial sector. This was the key problem in the judicial system. Other first stand-alone project of this type that the Bank complaints included that judges were selected has funded. The project design was refined during according to non-objective criteria, that they ruled implementation, leading to greater participation on cases without adequate preparation or training, and ownership. and that bribery was the common practice to resolve cases or to speed up the slow and inefficient process. Instead of being randomly _________________________________________________________________________________________________ This project was recognized as Best Practice in Social Development by the Social Development Family and received an award for Excellence in Supervision (QSR) from the Quality Assurance Group (QAG). The task team leader was Waleed Haider Malik. This best practice note was prepared by Kathleen Kuehnast. The views expressed in this note are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policies of the World Bank. assigned, cases were selected by judges, a based NGO that promotes transparency in the procedure that encouraged corruption. judicial process through citizen involvement. Furthermore, 70 percent of the judges were Council members went to Venezuela to temporary, thus limiting their independence. demonstrate how NGOs could be beneficial to the judiciary. For example, the judges were introduced The judicial system was suffering from a to tracking systems used by other countries to tremendous case backlog. Between 1970 and 1991, make the courts more transparent and efficient and the ratio of judges to the population decreased by to monitor and publish the performance of judges. 29 percent. Concurrently, the time to process cases The training convinced the judges that bringing exceeded the legal processing time standards. For NGOs into the reform process would add value. example, processing criminal cases required more than 10 times the legal limit of 102 days. To eventually bring judges and NGOs together, the team decided to work first with the judges, then Top judges were leaving their positions at an with the NGOs. A series of workshops involved 4 alarming rate, since their poor pay, diminished groups of approximately 30 judges each. Choosing public image, and limited capacity compromised appropriate participants was critical, as they their effectiveness. With the absence of needed to be representative of the overall judiciary experienced judges, the judicial system lost in terms of gender, age, and region. The judiciary credibility. A public opinion poll conducted prior in Venezuela is fairly balanced in gender. More to 1992 revealed that only 7 percent of the difficult in the selection process was choosing population had confidence in the Supreme Court. judges who were viewed as having integrity and the trust of their peers. Coalitions for Change The participatory process took over six months. Project implementation began in 1995, but the lack Focus group discussions addressed the challenges of institutional capacity within the judiciary system facing the judiciary. Technical training sessions to handle a Bank loan led to project stagnation. followed. Reflecting on the judges' priorities and With astute analysis by the project team, a key building consensus among them were essential social component­the need to involve citizens in components of the process. From these meetings, the overall reform process­ was identified. The the project team identified judges who could act as team recognized that the people who use the court "change agents" in the reform process. Change system need to have a vehicle through which they agents were seen as those who might champion the can voice their concerns and make suggestions to project and help build ownership of it. improve the judicial process. In addition, the project team identified the need for a watchdog Next, the NGOs were slated for participatory coalition in which the judiciary and civil society training. Similarly, NGOs examined how courts could work together to establish a more functioned and where the constraints existed. They trustworthy judicial process. confirmed the need for transparency in the judicial process. To build consensus, the NGOs developed It quickly became apparent that, without a well- a list of critical actions for the judicial system to developed nongovernmental organization (NGO) take to gain efficiency and credibility. sector, strengthening the role of civil society in the judicial process in Venezuela would prove very Finally, bringing together the judges and NGO difficult. Although NGOs were present, they representatives proved to be a critical step in lacked umbrella organizations. Furthermore, developing the partnership with civil society. judges had little understanding as to what to civil During the special workshop, the two groups society organizations were and how they could shared their visions and priorities. The process work effectively with the judiciary. quickly demonstrated that the two sides had very similar goals. This understanding helped to The Bank task team realized that the judges needed develop "buy-in" for the project's objective of a consensus-building tool to gain support for the creating transparency in the judicial process. The use of NGOs in the reform process. A small group result was a new initiative through which common of judges participated in presentations made by the goals and mutual respect for the reforms were Council for Court Excellence, a Washington, D.C.- realized. 2 transparency in the judicial system. For example, Lessons Learned the backlog of cases has been addressed through instituting oral arguments. Previously, lawyers had · Effective partnership with civil society can make a to submit written arguments, which added to the significant contribution to judicial reform. delays in processing cases. For this reform to be · Capacity building workshops aid in creating accepted, sensitive consultations and effective partnerships among different groups of demonstrations were used to convince judges and stakeholders. lawyers of its effectiveness. · Measures to improve transparency and efficiency can be developed with the help of stakeholder Publication on the Supreme Court's website of past consultation, which also builds ownership. · and pending cases and decisions increases the Improved performance, lower transaction costs, and greater predictability in the judicial process transparency of the system. Another element of the increase public confidence in institutions. reforms addresses the high turnover of judges through providing better compensation. New Partnership Enables People's Access The new working relationship between civil The new partnership led to the establishment of an society and the judiciary is seen as the necessary NGO unit within the judiciary itself. This unit has conduit for the reforms. Without building trust and identified the needs of court users and promoted confidence between the two groups, it is doubtful the exchange of information between the public that the reforms would have passed. The project is and the judicial system management. It is through already being replicated in El Salvador and this NGO unit that individuals now can access the Guatemala. formal process. A specialist designated by the NGO community to act as a liaison to the judiciary Effective Supervision Produces operates the NGO unit. Forty-five NGOs use the Good Results services of the unit. Good supervision improved the Venezuela Judicial The judiciary NGO unit conducted a participatory Infrastructure Development Project. It has helped assessment of the courts, drawing on stakeholders' to establish performance indicators of outputs and experiences and perspectives. Specifically, it judicial process indicators. Indicators are published analyzed what information was needed for a and in the public domain in Venezuela. citizen to participate in the legal process. Supervision also has increased transparency, made justice more efficient and accessible, and built Participatory Cooperation partnerships with civil society to sustain the reforms. A key component to successful implementation of the project was the use of participatory cooperation Effective project supervision led to the following between the judiciary and the NGOs. Cooperation project accomplishments: that began at the local level has permeated the system horizontally throughout the country and · The partnership between the Judicial Council vertically up to the Supreme Court. and the NGO, Alianza para la Justicia, resulted in the establishment of a judicial Dissemination of information has proven to be evaluation procedure for prescreening all another key element in building constituencies for judges to weed out unqualified ones. NGOs the reforms. The government has conducted an lobbied to support the passage of the law. information campaign to publicize and share lessons of the reform process. The Bank also has · The NGO Alianza assisted in drafting a new provided support in developing "knowledge legal code on family law to address violence sharing" activities. With the Bank's support, the against women. Supreme Court has established a website. · The backlog of cases has been significantly The cooperation between civil society and the reduced in three of the pilot states. judiciary has enabled a series of institutional reforms that have increased efficiency and 3 · The Judicial Council has become more initially increasing knowledge, the workshops professional and effective with the reduction of moved to eliciting opinions and comments on the its staff from 1,200 to 400. possible alternatives for Venezuela. This process facilitated decisionmaking over the reform process. Building Capacity and Ownership Similarly, through forming a network and The process of building capacity to implement participating directly, NGOs became partners in reforms added to the government's ownership of reform, rather than external critics. With the the project. Members of the judiciary increased establishment of Citizens' Councils to oversee their knowledge of judicial procedures adopted performance of judges, ongoing civil society elsewhere through workshops and seminars. From participation in monitoring has been formalized. "Social Development Notes" are published informally by the Social Development Family in the Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development Network of the World Bank. For additional copies, contact Social Development Publications, World Bank, 1818 H Street, NW, MSN MC5-507, Washington, DC 20433, USA, Fax: 202-522-3247, E-mail: sdpublications@worldbank.org. 4 Printed on Recycled Paper