A PANORAMA ON PERFORMANCE INDICATORS AND EVALUATION OF JUDGES: AN ANALYSIS

Abstract

Access to justice is one of the fundamental rights of every citizen. States are bound to protect this right by providing justice through a fair, impartial and competent judicial system. It is thus intrinsic that States must ensure to establish and maintain an impartial, competent, efficient and effective judiciary. Like other public institutions, judiciary, is also run by public funds, thus its performance may also be subjected to social audit. Internally the judicial decisions are cheked through the scheme of appeal and revision. However, such evaluation are merly confined to see the exercise or non-exercise, use or mis-use of certain judicial powers. This evxercise has nothing to do with the quality of juducial decision making. There is no other formal mechanism to evaluate the performance of judges both qualitatively and quantatevly. Arguably, independence of the judiciary demands that the performance of judges may not be subjected to evaluation. However, there is an emphire of litrature to show that one way or the other, different states have adopted different approaches to evaluate such performance. After encompasing the available litrature, this article argues that independence of judiciary in the strict sense does not exonerate judges from evaluation of their performance. Based on best practices, the article discusses different types of performance indicators, approaches and modes of performance evaluation, and challenges to the evaluation mechanism. The articles review the evaluation system prevalent in Pakistan. Emphasizing the efficient use of technology, court and case management, the article presents a model of evaluation for judges in Pakistan. The paper concludes that a quality control cell at the level of each high court shall be indispensible before starting any evaluation program.