This page provides inks and information about programs from other jurisdictions containing possible useful infomation
and guidelines for court watch programs. Note that many such programs deal with political and special
interest issues and family court matters (including partisan political matters, child custody and abuse, human trafficking,
etc) rather than criminal cases involving government corruption. This page seeks to provide information
related to the latter as much as possible; however, experiences and techniques from any court watch program may be useful
in initiating a new anti-corruotion court watch program.
COURT WATCH Definition
program to make courts accountable: a
community program set up to allow concerned citizens to observe trial proceedings in order to ensure the effectiveness of
the legal system and the competency and fairness of judges
.
THE SLIDE SHOW below has been prepared for court watch programs related to human abuse but
is applicable in general to any such program.
Crime reduction advocates, retirees and other concerned citizens are among the many who believe
our courts should be monitored by the public. Toward that end, they have formed court-watching groups that sit in on court
cases, to observe judges' behavior and courtroom procedures, often for months at a time and then compile their findings and
translate them into recommendations for reform.
The goals of court-watchers vary. Some aim to remove unfair judges. Others want to promote public scrutiny of the
judicial system. Several groups monitor judges to determine whether they should be supported for re-election or have action
taken against them. For example, in Dallas, Texas, the Committee for a Qualified Judiciary works to ensure that candidates
with exceptional credentials are elected to local judgeships. They educate the public about judicial candidates, believing
it is better and easier to elect a good judge initially then to try and remove a poor one later.
Some court-watching groups put pressure on judges they consider to be unprofessional, unfair or otherwise unsuitable.
In response to the high crime rate in Oakland, California, a group of court-watchers organized as Citizens for Law and Order,
work for the removal of judges they believe are not strict enough in sentencing convicted defendants.
Other court-watching groups focus their efforts on procedural matters. They look for mistakes or abuses in how
the courts operate; judges who are routinely late for court, take too many recesses, or fail to discipline misbehavior in
the courtrooms. One court-watching group in New York City, for example, reported witnessing a judge flipping a coin to determine
how long a sentence to impose on a convicted criminal. Court-watchers also look for misconduct by private and government attorneys.
Some court-watching projects target a specific judge or crime to focus on. One nationally prominent group, MADD
(Mothers Against Drunk Driving), has organized and implemented court-watching campaigns to monitor drunk-driving cases.
The Cook County Court-Watching Project in Chicago, an independent organization affiliated with the League of Women
Voters, has established a program that trains volunteers in what to look for in courtroom proceedings and how to gather and
record data about each case.
Once the information is compiled, court-watching groups publicize and use their findings in a variety of ways.
Some summarize their data and make recommendations for improving the courts, including letters and reports to court officials,
parole boards, newspapers, radio and television stations, elected representatives and judges. These recommendations can focus
on anything from general courtroom procedures and calendaring to complaints about abusive conduct in a particular court.
Other, more drastic measures to which court-watchers have resorted include initiating a recall drive of an elected
judge and placing an advertisement in a local newspaper to criticize the mishandling of a case. Positive measures are also
taken, such as awarding certificates to judges or prosecutors the court-watchers determine are exemplary public servants.
http://www.halt.org/lic/art.php?aid=31
Tips on starting a court monitoring program
The thought of starting a court monitoring program may seem daunting. But by building on your experience
and meeting with others knowledgeable about your courts, you can develop a program to create lasting change in your justice
system. Here are some hints.
Do your research and start to gather allies
Start
by meeting with people who are familiar with your local courts, including...advocacy groups...They may be sources of community
support or volunteers, and may have knowledge of previous attempts to monitor the courts in your area.
Talk with key members of your justice system
We recommend interviewing court personnel to let them know what you are doing, get their feedback, and identify
concerns.
Identify courts and cases to be watched
If you are considering court monitoring, you are probably aware of many problems that you could address, but
don’t try to do everything at once. We recommend that you keep your focus narrow to start. Develop simple court monitoring
forms that are easy for volunteers to complete and for you to analyze.
Recruit and train volunteers
Volunteers can be trained in a group or one-on-one, depending on your needs. Make sure volunteers understand their role
as observers, and your expectations.
Manual: Developing a Court Monitoring Program
The
Developing a Court Monitoring Program manual provides all the tools you need to start a court monitoring program,
including:
��
A step-by-step guide to deciding on your program structure and assessing you or your agency’s
capacity for starting a court monitoring program.
��
Ideas on what courts to watch and what to watch for, including ideas and advice from programs across
the country.
��
Information on managing court monitoring data, including how to collect, store and analyze court
monitoring forms.
��
Strategies for engaging with others to promote system-wide change.
��
PowerPoint presentations and activities for volunteer training and community education.
��
An extensive appendix of resource materials and much more!
Manual: Managing Court Monitor Volunteers
The
Managing Court Monitor Volunteers manual provides an in-depth look at running a court monitoring volunteer program, including:
��
Ready-to-print volunteer recruitment flyers, applications, and screening materials as well as information
on creating volunteer guidelines and strategies for recruiting and retaining volunteers.
��
A CD with nine PowerPoint presentations to use at your volunteer training as well as sample training
activities, continuing education sessions, recommended reading, and helpful websites.
��
Information on briefing and debriefing volunteer court monitors, ensuring accuracy of monitoring
notes, and using technology to enhance your volunteer program.
��
Information on raising funds for your program including sample solicitation letters and grant language.
NOTE: The above two manuals relate to programs
specifically directed to making the justice system more effective and responsive in handling cases of violence against women
and children, and to create a more informed and involved public. However, they may be useful in setting up any tyupe court
monitoring program. WATCH also offers training, webinars, and other tools for court monitoring programs. For more information
go to: http://www.watchmn.org/training
JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OFTHE STATE OF ARIZONA, USA
Judges should:
administer justice fairly, ethically, uniformly, promptly and efficiently;
be free from personal bias when making decisions and decide cases based on the proper application
of law;
issue prompt rulings that can be understood and make decisions that demonstrate competent legal analysis;
act with dignity, courtesy and patience; and
effectively manage their courtrooms and the administrative responsibilities of their office.
What is court monitoring and what are the benefits?
What is court monitoring?Court monitoring is a process of observing and
gathering information on the courts. Monitoring includes observing real time court proceedings as well as conducting research
and investigation of the court, its practices and procedures.
Why monitor?Systems that go unmonitored tend to serve their own purposes.
Monitoring promotes an open and transparent court process and holds the system accountable for protecting victim and public
safety. Monitoring also engages the public to take responsibility for the justice system. This strengthens our democracy and
the well being of our society.
Benefits of monitoringMonitoring provides a consistent and on-going public
presence with an independent viewpoint. Court monitor groups can provide feedback on individual cases, supports policy efforts,
and shed light on gaps in the system
Begun in response to continuous complaints from community
residents and street-level police officers concerning the "revolving-door" nature
of the Marion County criminal justice system. The program is designed to bring the residents of neighborhoods into the courtroom to convey the reallife impact
of the particular criminal offenses or offenders that most directly affect the quality
of life in the neighborhoods. Consisting of a partnership between the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office and residents of the neighborhoods that the
office serves, the program’s objective is to persuade all of the actors within
the Marion County criminal court system to take a more proactive role in preventing
crime in the community by imposing meaningful sentences on offenders who chronically victimize the community.
·
Court Watch focuses
primarily on lowlevel, chronic
offenders who have several cases pending within the system, who frequently violate conditions of
pre-trial release by committing new criminal offenses,
and who have a reputation within the neighborhoods for being consistent troublemakers.
·
Residents who
are Court Watch members receive a weekly list of court hearings scheduled on Court Watch cases. The community prosecutor and paralegal
work closely with Court Watch members to educate
them about the criminal court process and to resolve any confusion stemming from the intricacies of the system.
·
Residents are encouraged to attend bond
review and sentencing hearings because
they often possess additional information about
a particular case or offender that is pertinent to issues raised during such hearings. During these hearings, residents are often called to testify
about the impact of offenses suc h as prostitution, criminal trespass,
or drug-related misdemeanors and felonies, and the relationship between these offenses or offenders and other criminal activity in the neighborhood.
·
Court Watch
members may attend as many or as few court hearings as their schedules permit. Although court bailiffs do their best to get Court Watch cases
called before the judge as soon as possible, members should
set aside about three (3) hours for each hearing. Members are encouraged to bring reading materials to occupy their time while waiting for the case
to be called before the judge.
·
Weekly Court
Watch reports contain case information including the factual basis of the charged offenses, the name and phone number of the trial prosecutor
assigned to the case, the date and time of the next court hearing,
and the location and the phone number for the court room in which the hearing is to be held
Background Information on Judicial corruption
On January 25, 2005, and on December 10, 2006, PhilippinesSocial Weather Stations released the results of its 2 surveys on corruption in the judiciary; it published that: a) like 1995, 1/4 of lawyers said many/very many judges are corrupt. But (49%) stated that a judges received bribes, just 8% of lawyers admitted they
reported the bribery, because they could not prove it. [Tables 8-9]; judges, however, said, just 7% call many/very
many judges as corrupt[Tables 10-11];b) "Judges see some corruption; proportions who said - many/very many corrupt judges
or justices: 17% in reference to RTC judges, 14% to MTC judges, 12% to Court of Appeals justices, 4% i to Shari'a Court judges,
4% to Sandiganbayan justices and 2% in reference to Supreme Court justices [Table 15].[
The September 14, 2008, Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC) survey, ranked the Philippines 6th (6.10) among corrupt Asian judicial systems. PERC stated that "despite India and the Philippines
being democracies, expatriates did not look favourably on their judicial systems because of corruption." PERC reported Hong Kong and Singapore have the best judicial systems in Asia, with Indonesia and Vietnam the worst: Hong Kong's judicial system scored 1.45 on the scale (zero
representing the best performance and 10 the worst); Singapore with a grade of 1.92, followed by Japan (3.50), South Korea
(4.62), Taiwan (4.93), the Philippines (6.10), Malaysia (6.47), India (6.50), Thailand (7.00), China (7.25), Vietnam's (8.10) and Indonesia
(8.26).
In the September 23, 2008, Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index (global survey ranking countries in terms of perceived corruption), the Philippines dropped to 141st, down 10
places from 2007, among 180 countries surveyed. It scored a 2.3 in the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), lower than 2007's
2.5, on a scale where 10 is the highest possible gradeVincent Lazatin, TAN executive director, said: “We are compared
to our nearest neighbors Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam, with Vietnam seen as eventually overtaking us in a few
years. The difference is that (in other countries) when business sets aside money to grease the wheels, they know that they
will get what they paid for. In the Philippines, there is no certainty."[34] (Source Wikipedia.com)
The following links provde some criteria that might be used in Court Watch programs as
well as potential problems that may arise based upon experience of other countries in court performance evealuation
This is a private website. Information is for private use only.
Copyright Notice: In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C.
Section 107, any copyrighted work on this website is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have
expressed an interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only. Ref.:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
