National Consultant on judicial reasoning
Vacancy Number: Pr18/01711
Contacts:
Mr. Alexei Ghertescu.
Background
Implementation of the Justice Sector Reform is one of the main pre-requisites for Moldova to advance the overall reform process and to achieve compliance with the internationally recognized democratic standards. At the same time, an efficient, transparent and reliable justice system is a precondition for the sustainable development.
The problem of inadequate and insufficient reasoning/argumentation of judicial acts represents an issue of major concern for the whole judicial system. Unlike other branches of power, the powers of judges are not subject to the same controls from the general public and society and, therefore, courts need the active acceptance by the public of their decisions and shall demonstrate that the judges proceed in a non-arbitrary manner. The quality of judicial acts should reconcile the public with the use of power by courts and, therefore, judicial decisions must be publicly justified according to certain traditionally accepted techniques.
The improvements in judicial reasoning should increase the transparency of the judiciary and lead to the better quality of the acts of justice in Moldova, and may also contribute to reducing the number of decisions against the Republic of Moldova by the European Court of Human Rights. As a result of such improvements, the right of citizens to a fair trial and access to justice should be strengthened and the trust to the justice system increase.
Scope of work
The main objective of this consultancy is to provide support to the International Consultant contracted by UNDP in conducting a baseline study of the current situation with judicial reasoning as used by Moldovan courts in motivating their decisions, identify gaps and provide relevant recommendations to improve the quality of judicial reasoning by Moldovan courts.
In order to achieve the objective the International Consultant, assisted by the National Consultant, shall perform the following tasks:
1. Preliminary review:
- To select and conduct a preliminary review of several decisions of Moldovan courts (together with decisions of Equality Council (national antidiscrimination enforcement body) and Constitutional Court of Moldova) in order to provide to the International Consultant basic understanding of the system of constructing judicial decisions and the methods of judicial reasoning employed in Moldova;
2. Conducting a study on judicial reasoning in Moldovan courts:
The National Consultant shall support the International Consultant in conducting a comprehensive study on judicial reasoning as currently employed by Moldovan courts and judges. Within this task he/she to provide necessary support to the International Consultant on Moldovan legislation, Moldovan legal system, judicial decisions, decisions of the Equality Council and Constitutional Court and other relevant information and materials available necessary for the fulfilment of tasks
The activities that include the study should cover at least the following:
- Determining, together with the International Consultant, the criteria for choosing the decisions that will be analysed during the study on judicial reasoning;
- Analysis of the judicial reasoning as employed by Moldovan courts when making their decisions, methods and techniques of reasoning used and their sufficiency (including their comparison with the decisions of Equality Council and Constitutional Court of Moldova);
- Comparison of the methods and techniques of reasoning employed by Moldovan courts and courts in countries that are representative of the existing major legal systems;
- Analysis of weaknesses, gaps and shortcomings of the existing methods and techniques of judicial reasoning existing in Moldova;
- Recommendations on ways to improve methods and techniques of judicial reasoning in Moldova;
- Analysis of the existing trainings on legal reasoning in Moldova (whether as separate courses or as part of the curricula within other courses and training programmes at undergraduate or post-graduate and/or professional levels);
- identify best solutions for developing trainings on judicial/legal reasoning and ways to integrate them into the existing training programmes in law (including professional trainings of judges);
- provide recommendations on how to integrate elements of judicial reasoning into mock trials and other practical training sessions conducted for future judges and prosecutors at the National Institute of Justice of Moldova;
- Other relevant issues deemed important by the Consultant in the context of the overall objective of the consultancy;
3. Developing a detailed outline of a training programme on judicial reasoning for judges and other legal professionals:
The National Consultant is expected to provide support to the International Consultant in preparing an outline for a training programme on judicial reasoning that would serve the basis for developing of a substantial course on judicial reasoning for judges and other legal professionals. The outline should meet at least the following criteria:
- identify the objectives of the prospective training courses;
- identify major topics that should be covered by the course and provide description for each topic, including the integration of UN and CoE human rights standards and issues into judicial reasoning;
- provide methodology for fulfilling the objectives of the course;
- identify sources of information and bibliography that can be used for further development of the course materials;
- determine the criteria for the selection of trainers who will teach the course and the needs for the relevant training of trainers;
4. Produce regular progress reports;
The Consultant will provide necessary inputs to the International Consultant for preparing regular progress reports with the details on the progress of the assignment, activities performed, any issues and problems identified and solutions proposed.
5. Perform other assignment related tasks.
Requirements for experience
I. Academic Qualifications:
- Master’s Degree or equivalent (5-year university education) in Law; PhD degree is an asset;
II. Working experience:
- At least 5 years of previous professional experience as a judge, a prosecutor, defence lawyer, judge’s assistant or other similar profession related to pleading and presenting complex arguments before courts and/or preparing judicial decisions;
- Previous experience in teaching law on academic or professional training levels, particularly in providing professional trainings to judges, is an advantage;
- Experience in developing training programmes curricula and relevant training methodologies for legal professionals;
III. Competencies:
- Demonstrated knowledge and understanding of various tools, techniques and methods of legal/judicial reasoning and their practical application by courts;
- Demonstrated knowledge of various techniques and methods of judicial/legal reasoning as used by Moldovan courts, the Constitutional Court of Moldova, Equality council, and other relevant institutions;
- Knowledge of differences in techniques and approaches to judicial reasoning in various legal systems and countries is an advantage;
- Fluency in Romanian and English languages;
- Knowledge of one or more additional languages relevant for Moldova, including Bulgarian, Gagauzian, Romani, Russian, Ukrainian or sign language is an asset.
IV. Personal qualities:
- Proven commitment to the core values of the United Nations, in particular, respecting differences of culture, gender, religion, ethnicity, nationality, language, age, HIV status, disability, and sexual orientation, or other status;
- Responsibility, creativity, flexibility and punctuality.
The UNDP Moldova is committed to workforce diversity. Women, persons with disabilities, LGBTI, Roma and other ethnic, linguistic or religious minorities, persons living with HIV, as well as refugees and other noncitizens legally entitled to work in the Republic of Moldova, are particularly encouraged to apply.
Documents to be included
Interested individual consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications:
- Offeror's Letter confirming Interest and Availability;
- Technical Proposal:
- Explaining how applicant responds to each of the qualification requirements (particularly providing details on the previously implemented similar projects) and why he/she is the most suitable for the work;
- Shortly describing methodology for conducting the study and achieving the respective tasks;
- Personal information (as a detailed CV or as a Personal History Form /P11) with at least three referees;
- Financial proposal.
Financial proposal
The financial proposal shall specify a total lump sum amount, and payment terms around specific and measurable (qualitative and quantitative) deliverables (i.e. whether payments fall in instalments or upon completion of the entire contract). Payments are based upon output, i.e. upon delivery of the services specified in the Terms of Reference.
In order to assist the requesting unit in the comparison of financial proposals, the financial proposal will include a breakdown of this lump sum amount (including fees and taxes, travel costs, accommodation costs, communication, and number of anticipated working days).
Payment will be made based on achieved deliverables, including a final report submitted to the UNDP Moldova Project Manager.
Travel
All envisaged travel costs must be included in the financial proposal. This includes all travel to join duty station/repatriation travel. In general, UNDP should not accept travel costs exceeding those of an economy class ticket. Should the IC wish to travel on a higher class he/she should do so using their own resources.
In the case of unforeseeable travel, payment of travel costs including tickets, lodging and terminal expenses should be agreed upon, between the respective business unit and Individual Consultant, prior to travel and will be reimbursed.
No travel costs are envisaged under this assignment.
