The meeting was chaired by Mrs Pâquerette Girard, First Vice President of the IAJ, President of the European Association of Judges - Regional Group of the IAJ. In attendance were the President of the IAJ, Mr Ramon Rodriguez Arribas, the Honorary Presidents, Mr Voss and Mr Woratsch, the Vice Presidents of the IAJ, Mr Broekhoven and Mr Markel, the Secretary General, Mr Bonomo, the Deputy Secretaries General, Mr Meriggiola and Mr Oberto, the Assistants to the Secretary General, Mr D’Agostino and Mr Gargiulo, as well as the following delegates, representing their respective associations, which are members of the International Association of Judges and of the European Association of Judges:
 

Austria	Mr Markel
Belgium	Mr Delvoie
Czech Republic	Mr Vyklicky
Denmark	Mr Knudsen
Estonia	Mrs Kerstna Vaks
F.Y.R.O.M.	Mrs Caca-Nivolovska
Finland	Mr Kiuru
France	Mr Kriegk
Germany	Mr Lieberoth and Mrs Peters
Greece	Mr Fourlanos
Hungary	Mr Lichtenstein
Iceland	Mr Gislason
Ireland	Mr Murphy
Israel (observer)	Mr Lindenstrauss
Italy	Mr Mogini
Latvia	Mrs Sebrina
Liechtenstein	Mr Hagen
Lithuania	Mrs Smirnoviéné
Luxembourg	Mr Gehlen
Malta	Mr Agius
Netherlands	Mr Nÿenhof
Norway	Mr Eidesen and Mr Smukkestad
Portugal	Mr Reis Figueira
Romania	Mr Acsinte, Mrs Costiniu and Mrs Dobrinescu
Slovakia	Mr Bradac and Mr Roharik
Slovenia	Mr Zalar and Mrs Tratnik
Spain	Mrs Atienza
Sweden	Mr Carrick
Switzerland	Mr Gass and Mr Zappelli
United Kingdom	Mr Fricker

 

 1. Information
 After the introductory speech of Mr Zalar, on behalf of the National Association of the Slovenian Judges, the President opened the meeting at 2 pm by thanking the Slovenian colleagues for the perfect organisation of the meeting and their hospitality. She said that for the first time, thanks to the Slovenian colleagues, a meeting of the EAJ would be able to have a simultaneous English-French and French-English translation. She added she had decided to anticipate item 3 of the agenda in the meeting of today, in preparation for the press conference which would be held later the same day at 6 p.m.
 Mr Oberto explained the contents of a document distributed to the delegates concerning the proposal for an amendment of the minutes of the EAJ meeting in Puerto Rico. According to this amendment, in the third phrase of point 5.-1bis the words “on this matter” should be replaced by the words “on the matter of computer crime”. The amendment, as well as the official report of the meeting of Puerto Rico, were unanimously approved.

1.-1 general information from the President;
 Mrs Girard pointed out that, after the meeting of Puerto Rico, the Presidency Committee met in Madrid on February 22, 1998. The meeting was also attended by Mr Broekhoven and Mr Markel. On February 23, 1998 the king of Spain delivered the “Justice in the World” award to our former colleague Adolfo Beria d’Argentine, an Italian judge and Honorary Attorney General of the Supreme Court of Cassation of his country. Beria d’Argentine has effectively worked for a long time in order to improve relations in the field of judicial co-operation among different countries all over the world under the auspices of UNO. The President added that the choice made by the Jury - presided over by the IAJ Honorary President Mr Voss - was one of a very high level. During the Madrid meeting, the Presidency Committee also dealt with the questions concerning the Foundation “Justice in the World”. The magazine of the Foundation was also presented. It will be sent soon to member associations and it will contain a copy of our review “Euro Iustitia”. The Foundation will publish also a brochure containing a detailed organisation chart of the Foundation and of the IAJ. This brochure will be distributed at the latest in Oporto by the President.
 
1.-2. general information from the Secretary General;
 Mr Bonomo said he had just sent to all associations the invitation, the application form and the program of the meeting of Oporto, as well as the program of the optional excursions which will take place before and after the meeting. He recommended that the deadline for the application, fixed for May 22, 1998, be respected. With regard to the study commissions, the questionnaires of the second and third study commissions were already distributed and the deadline of April 15 for  sending replies had already been fixed. The questionnaire of the fourth commission had just been  distributed and the deadline of July 1 had been fixed for replies. The questionnaire of the first commission would be distributed soon. Mr Bonomo said that the Secretariat had prepared a collection of the conclusions of the second and the fourth study commissions since the year 1980. The collection of the conclusions of the third commission will be perhaps ready for the meeting of Oporto. The Secretary General pointed out finally that the Brazilian Association of  Judges sent an invitation to all national associations for a seminar on environmental law which will be held in Macapà (Brazil), on 3-7 June, 1998. The local association offers hospitality for three or four days. For further information, he requested to contact the Vice President of the IAJ, Mr Calandra.
 Mr Oberto explained the contents of the documents which had been distributed and in particular the 1998 EAJ directory updated after the meeting of Puerto Rico, as well as the copies of the first pages of the Web sites of the EAJ. He recalled that the Web addresses of the EAJ are the following: a) for general information <http://space.tin.it/edicola/goberto/> ; b) for the magazine Euro Iustitia
<http://www.droit.umontreal.ca/palais/magistrature/aem/journalvol1.htm>.

1.-3. information upon the budget;
 Mrs Girard pointed out that all associations received a letter containing the request for the contributions to the IAJ for 1998 which comprised the 2% increase voted in Puerto Rico. The President pointed out the wish expressed by the members of the Presidency Committee that as many as possible countries move from a lower to a higher group, considering that the activities of the IAJ increase each year. Mr Bonomo informed the assembly that associations of Argentina and Brazil moved from the second to the first group. With regard to the budget of the EAJ there had been no significant modification since the previous year. For 1998 the EAJ has at its disposal the sum of 5 million lire (approximately 5.000 DM) and the sum of 8 million lire (approximately 8.000 DM) resulting from arrears from the previous years. The total is thus approximately 13 million lire (13.000 DM). These funds will be used to pay expenses for the two “Euro Iustitia” 1998 issues.

1.-4 information upon the meetings: 1. ENM/DRA/ERA/MEDEL/DRA, 1998;
 The President spoke initially about the conference organised by the ENM, the DRA, the ERA, the MEDEL and the EAJ. She recalled that it was the third seminar of this kind. The subject to be treated this year will be the following: “Towards an European legal space. Judicial co-operation in the penal field”. Mrs Girard added that this seminar will be held in Paris on November 4-6, 1998. The invitations will be sent either to the ministries of justice or to the high councils for the judiciary. The cost of accommodation will be borne by the ministries of justice of the each country. 40 judges will be invited from all E.U. countries, except Germany (20 judges) and France (40 judges, who have already registered). The EAJ and the MEDEL will have each ten places at their disposal, at their own expense. She said on this subject that the ENM, being very close to the MEDEL, wished to make great publicity for the “Appeal of Geneva”, whose signatories will all attend the meeting. It is therefore important that we prepare this conference actively. The programme will deal with matters such as extradition, international rogatory letters, Europol, penal co-operation and the third pillar of Maastricht, Corpus Juris (and the European public prosecutor), the UCLAF (unit to combat frauds to the interests of the Community). Rapporteurs are requested to bring practical cases concerning difficulties met in the field of legal co-operation.
 The conference will draw also the attention of the media, since its last session will be chaired by Mrs Anita Gradin, European police chief in charge of justice affairs and will conclude with a final debate which should emphasise two different points of view: the one of the MEDEL and the one of the EAJ. Mrs Girard’s wish is that the EAJ can assure the presence of a large and qualified attendance. For this purpose it appears necessary to prepare this conference in connection with the working group chaired by Mr Markel on the treaty of Schengen. Mrs Girard distributed also copies of the “Appeal of Geneva”, as well as an unofficial translation of this document prepared by the Secretariat General.
 As regards the Schengen Treaty, Mr Markel took the floor explaining the contents of the document which he had just distributed. He highlighted the need for the EAJ to take action in order to be able to obtain the subsidies envisaged in the Grotius program. He added that, in order to achieve this aim, applications should be sent to the Commission before March 31, 1998. In any event the E.U. will refund only part of the expenses. He then said that in his report he also outlined the possible structure of a seminar on the subject of judicial co-operation in penal matters, as well as the budget for such an initiative. Finally he added that the Austrian Ministry of Justice could contribute in a consistent way to the expenses of the participants coming from Central and Eastern European countries. It would be however necessary that other national associations contribute in a significant way to the expenses of this conference. It was thus necessary to decide if we want to organise this conference for this year or next year.
 Mr Voss suggested to set up a working group in order to prepare the Paris conference. Mr Woratsch stressed that the preparation of the conference of Paris is something different compared to the working group on the treaty of Schengen. For Mr Kriegk working groups should not be multiplied. At the end of the discussion the assembly decided that Mr Markel would continue his work at the head of the working group on the treaty of Schengen, which will also deal with the preparation of the Paris conference. All national associations are invited to send to Mr Markel their observations and their proposals in order to prepare the Paris conference. Persons interested in this initiative could be the following: Mrs Andrei and Mr Bac (Romania), Mrs Arens (France), Mr Ariens (the Netherlands), Mrs Atienza (Spain), Mrs Debnarova (Slovakia), Mr Woratch and Mr Markel (Austria). Mr Markel invited the delegates to ask their own national associations to what extent they are ready to contribute to the project. The sum needed by this working group is about of 8.500 Euros.
 Mrs Girard invited national associations to communicate to Mr Markel which is the position of each national association upon the “Appeal of Geneva”. The document will form the base of the discussions in Paris. She added finally that she would like Luxembourg also to take part in the work of the group chaired by Mr Markel.
 
2. ERA Congress 1998;
 With regard to the meetings in the field of civil co-operation, Mrs Girard said that she took part in two conferences after Puerto Rico, the first of which took place in Berlin, organised by Eurojuris, on the topic of the procedure of exequatur. In this meeting she presented the position of France and of EAJ. Another meeting was organised by the ERA, the DRA, the ENM, the MEDEL and the EAJ on the matter of co-operation in the civil law field; it was a very technical meeting, during which topics such as the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Communities on the application of the Brussels treaty and civil co-operation in the future were dealt with. On this subject, a third conference will take place on November the 20 and 21, 1998 in Trier. This will be the annual ERA congress whose subject will be: “the European citizen and European legal space”; the EAJ President will thus be able to speak on the application of the treaties and of the conventions and on the problem of the exequatur in civil and commercial matters.
 The President said she had been contacted by the European Union of Judges Dealing with Commercial Matters. This organisation had requested us to subscribe a co-operation agreement. Mr Meriggiola informed the assembly on the goals of this organisation and Mrs Girard said that is an association of judges who can also be non-professional. The assembly instructed Mr Meriggiola to contact this association. Mr Meriggiola said that he would be in Strasbourg on April 23 and that he would contact this association.
 The President said she had received from Mr Meriggiola other information concerning an invitation on behalf of the “European Movement”, which organised a  conference at The Hague  on May 8-10, 1998 on the following subject: “Are we building 21st Century Europe?”. Mrs Girard asked whether the Dutch or Belgian colleagues know this movement. Mr Meriggiola said that it is the European Parliament which is behind this organisation. He added that 18 NGOs were invited to this conference.  350 of them are represented within the Council of Europe. The assembly charged Mr Nÿenhof to take part in this conference and to report on it in the meeting of Oporto. Mr Meriggiola will send the documents concerning this congress.

1.-5 information upon Euro-Justitia, the EAJ Journal.
 Mrs Girard informed the assembly about the publishing of the second issue of Euro Iustitia. She cordially thanked Maja Tratnik for her work as well as all those who contributed by writing articles for the newspaper. She added that she sent a copy of Euro Iustitia to several personalities of the European Union bodies as well as to the Council of Europe. Mrs Tratnik invited all the colleagues to contribute to the drafting of our review by writing articles in English or in French. The next issue will be published before the meeting of Oporto. Mr Voss publicly thanked Mr Tratnik for the work accomplished.

3. Peculiar situations of the Judiciary in the countries of central and eastern Europe:
3.-1 report upon the situation in Czech Republic (Jan Nÿenhof and Ernst Markel);
3.-2 relations with the CEELI and the new associations of eastern and central Europe.
 Mrs Girard recalled the resolution adopted in Milan in favour of the colleagues of the Czech Republic. Recently, at the request of the same association, she decided to send a letter to the president of the Czech Republic, Mr Vaclav Havel. Mrs Girard thanked Mr Fricker for his assistance in the drafting the letter in the English language. She added that Mr Fricker gave her a copy of an article on the situation in the Czech Republic published on the New York Review. She recalled that in that very morning she had a meeting with the President of the Republic of Slovenia, who is a friend of Mr Havel,  and who promised his support on the initiative of the EAJ, aiming at improving the situation of the independence of the judicial power in this country. Mrs Girard then said that the French Court of Cassation will organise a conference next week on the civil and penal procedures of the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic. She will thus have the occasion to meet the President of the Supreme Court of that country and to speak to him about the situation of the judicial power in the Czech Republic.
 The President added that a copy of the letter addressed to Mr Havel was available for the delegates. Mr Vyklicky took the floor saying initially that the letter from the EAJ had a very great echo in the media of his country. He briefly explained the situation of the judicial power of the country, by saying that, following the separation from the Slovak Republic, the Parliament approved a law which made it possible for the government to transfer judges against their will, without any geographical limitation, and even to revoke them. The Czech Republic is the only Central  and Eastern European country not to have an independent and representative body for the self-administration of the judicial power. The government has uncontested power in the appointment and the career of judges as well as of the heads of the jurisdictions, who - on their hand - have remarkable powers on judges. No support can arrive from the public opinion of the country, which is very heavily influenced by the government. The only help is that which can come from international organisations such as ours.
 Mr Bradac explained the situation of judicial power in the Slovak Republic by saying that it is almost as alarming as that of the Czech Republic. The government there has also too broad a power in the nomination and the career of judges and it does not respect the decisions of the Constitutional Court. Mr Woratsch said that he had been appointed expert for the European Union and that he had been charged to study the situation of Slovakia; his conclusions are rather similar to that of Mr Bradac: the only difference - compared to the Czech Republic - is that in Slovakia a Judicial Council exists, but this body has only advisory capacities.
 A debate followed the declarations of the colleagues of the Czech Republic and Slovakia, during which Mrs Costiniu proposed that  respective national associations in the various countries devote one day of solidarity to the judges of the Czech Republic and Slovakia; Mr Kriegk expressed the wish that national associations transmit the text of the letter to Mr Havel to the news services of each country; Mr Voss proposed that associations organise press conferences; Mr Kiuru proposed the organisation of a seminar in Prague on the subject of the independence of the judicial power; Mr Carrick suggested to constitute a working group and Mr Gass proposed to send a delegation to the countries concerned. Mrs Girard pointed out that Mr Markel and Mr Woratsch already went to the Czech Republic where they had several contacts with the colleagues of this country. She added that Austria, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom already constitute a working group on the subject. Mrs Girard proposed, on the contrary, to contact Mr Freiberger, in charge of the negotiations on the widening of the European Union as regards legal co-operation, in order to expose to him the situation in these two countries and to invite him to take contacts with Mr Markel and Mr Nÿenhof.
 Mr Bonomo suggested to propose to the Council of Europe to organise a seminar on the subject of the independence of the judicial power in the Czech Republic. Mrs Girard said that it was a good idea and charged Mr Markel to contact Mr De Vel for the organisation of this seminar. The assembly decided to send a letter similar to that which was sent to Mr Havel also to the Prime Minister of Slovakia, who exerts today also some of the capacities of the President of the Republic. Mrs Girard invited also national associations to send a copy of the letter to the news services of the various countries. The assembly decided moreover to constitute a working group under the responsibility of Mr Nÿenhof. The assembly finally charged Mr Hagen with contacting before April 23, 1998 Mrs Renate Wolwen, who is a lawyer of Liechtenstein, member of the sub-committee in charge of the control for the Council of Europe of the application and of the respect of the obligations of Member States. Finally Mr Vyklicky asked national associations to send letters to the authorities of his country.
 Mr Delvoie asked that the President send a letter of support and good wishes for the work of the general assembly of Belgian judges, which will meet on March 23, 1998, by pointing out the same principles contained in the letter sent to Mr Havel. The decision on this point was deferred to the meeting of March 22.
 Finally the President informed the assembly that she had received a request for co-operation in the training program for judges in the matter of asylum from the U.N.  High Commissioner for Refugees. She replied to this letter by saying that we will support this initiative. A similar answer was sent to a private institute in charge of setting up a national institute for the training of judges in Romania.

 At the beginning of the session - which started at 9.30 a.m. - the President distributed the corrected table on the subject “justice through figures”. She recommended to make it known in the respective countries; the topic will be dealt with again in Oporto.
 The President of the IAJ, Mr Rodriguez Arribas, informed the assembly of the activities of the foundation “Justice in the World”. He said that the first issue of the review of the Foundation had just been carried out. Soon 5,000 copies of the magazine will be sent to national associations and other institutions. He added that the first book published by the Institute would deal with the subject of comparative judicial organisation.
 The International Institute for the Judiciary will deploy three activities:  study (the first example of which will consist in the drafting of the book upon the comparative judicial organisation), research and training of judges. The following persons were appointed sub-managers: Mrs Mailhot (sub-director in charge of the activity of study); Mr Bennour (sub-director in charge of the activity of research); Mr Kriegk (sub-director in charge of the training activity). With regard to the training activity, the following continental delegates were appointed: Mr Sidnei Beneti (Latin America); Mr Markel (Europe); Mr Abdelgaffar (Africa).
 The first plenary session of the academic committee is planned for May 29 and 30 in Barcelona, under the auspices of the Regional Government of Catalonia. The first training activity will consist in a course on the role of the judge in the protection of the human rights. This training course will be held in the last week of October or in the first week of November 1998 at the La Coruña University, in Galicia, with the subsidy of the Galician Regional Government. Between thirty and fifty judges of every member association will be able to take part in this initiative. Information concerning the international award “Justice in the world” was already given by Mrs Girard.
 Mr Reis Figueira, in charge of the activities of publication of the Foundation, said that the first book published by the Institute will deal with the subject of comparative judicial organisation. The editorial board of this work is composed of the following people: Mr Calandra (Latin America), Mr Reis Figueira (Southern Europe), Mr Markus Thoma (Central Europe), Mr Verburg (Western Europe), Mrs Mailhot (Common Law), Mr Mohamed Abdelgaffar (Africa), Mr Kiuru (Scandinavia and Netherlands). Mrs Girard highlighted the importance of this work, which is the first entirely carried out by judges. Mr Reis Figueira added that the Institute envisaged for each year the publication of a book. The book on comparative judicial organisation should be ready for the end of this year. Mrs Girard requested Mr Reis Figueira to distribute the reports concerning Europe during the meeting of Oporto.

2. Reports on technical topics
2.-1 draft recommendation upon access to justice of consumers and the extra-judiciary regulation of small claims - GD XXIV;
 Mrs Girard informed the assembly of the draft recommendation upon the consumers’ access to justice and the non-judiciary regulation of small claims, by recalling that in Brussels, in December 1997, during a Council meeting, the Commission presented to the Council its draft communication. The aims of this communication are twofold: first of all the drafting of a form aimed at simplifying settlement of consumer claims;  then drafting of the great principles on the non-judiciary authorities which should decide upon these claims. The position of our working group on this subject was that these non-judicial bodies must have a remarkable level of independence and effectiveness. The position expressed by us was retained by the Council of the European Union. The states agree with the general principles of the communication, but they do not agree with a system which leaves to non-judicial authorities the settlement of all consumers small claims. The states rejected also the proposal to create a kind of European ombudsman. The adopted communication will be sent to Mrs Girard as well as to the associations members of the working group upon civil matter. The United Kingdom would propose to the E.U. General Secretariat a project of settlement of consumers small claims concerning only small and medium-sized companies. The President stressed the importance of this subject which directly affects the work of judges in each of the E.U. countries.

2.-2 perspectives of the GD XI - Environment, training sessions and communications;
 Mrs Girard informed the assembly that the Commission seemed to have decided to stop the training activity started with the support of the EAJ. ERA has not prepared any other training activity for 1998. The Centre for European Studies in Strasburg (CEES) made a proposal to the Commission on a course in autumn and the subsequent decision is awaited. Other seminars will be organised in Greece, England and Belgium for Greek, English and Belgian judges. That shows that the trend is now to organise seminars in various countries, but without any exchange of information between different countries. The President invited associations which would be interested to organise national seminars to contact her, so that she can put them in contact with the competent authorities.

2.-3 draft modifications of the Brussels I Convention (European Executory Title) and Brussels II Convention (in the field of family law);
 The subject of the executory title had great success last year in Brussels. This work was completed by Mrs Vernimmen. The first aspect relates to the modification of the 1968 Brussels convention. The Commission officially sent to the EAJ its communication entitled: “Towards an increased effectiveness in obtaining and in enforcing execution of the decisions within the European Union”. We had the possibility of taking part in the group of experts of the Commission charged to write the draft amendment of the Convention. Our suggestions were retained. Now this issue is again in the hands of the intergovernmental negotiating group. It is, obviously, a multilateral convention which must be negotiated by the Member States. Mrs Girard will give information on the progress of this work.
 In this communication, the Commission also studied the possibility of harmonising civil procedures, the first example of which is the procedure of payment injunction. The Commission intends to work out a harmonised fast procedure to reduce justice delays. Mrs Girard said that it was necessary to send our observations before the end of April; for this purpose, she asked for the opinion of the Austrian, Dutch, English, French and German delegates. Their remarks should reach her before the end of April. The President pointed out the contents of the modifications made to the system of Brussels and Lugano conventions, as well as Brussels 2, the new convention which should extend the principles of Brussels 1 convention to the fields of family law, with particular regard to divorce and  custody of children.
 Mr Kriegk said that, within the framework of the modification of Brussels 1, in order to avoid the disappearance of goods during the lawsuit and to ensure the execution of the court order, the possibility of requesting from the parts a disclosure concerning the parties’ assets (according to a model known in the Swedish system) had been examined. Mr Bonomo and Mrs Girard asked national associations which know this kind of disclosure, and in particular the Swedish delegation, to send information concerning the adopted system and the most significant problems encountered in this respect.
 
2.-4 draft recommendation of the Council of Europe upon efficiency of Justice;
 The President pointed out that in Puerto Rico it had been decided to send to the Council of Europe the conclusions of the First Study Commission. She said she had proceeded in this direction and had spoken with Mrs Killerby and Mr Esposito. Even though the EAJ had not been allowed to take part in the meetings of the Council of Europe working group as an observer, she however obtained an unofficial copy of the working document of the Council of Europe. She gave this document to Mr Delvoie, President of the IAJ First Study Commission, so that he can prepare a commentary upon it in Oporto. Mrs Girard asked moreover Mr D'Agostino, Italian delegate in the aforementioned working group, to inform the assembly in Oporto upon the work of the working group of the Council of Europe.

2.-5 draft recommendation “Judge’s Charter in Europe”
 At this point of the meeting Mrs Girard thanked  the Slovenian Association for the distribution of a press review.
 The President pointed out that in July 1997 the Council of Europe organised a conference on the European Judge’s Charter; the EAJ and the MEDEL were invited. Mr Cornu (Switzerland) represented the EAJ; Mr Broekhoven, Mr Carrick and Mr Bonomo had also been invited as representatives of their countries. The Council would like to write a recommendation on this subject by combining the EAJ’s Judge’s Charter in Europe and the statute worked out by the MEDEL. It seems that the Council of Europe wants to work out only principles of a very general nature. At this time there is not yet a project of text. The person in charge of this work, Mrs Wisniewska-Casals, informed us that a panel composed of three experts is preparing a draft charter, which will be sent to Mrs Girard as soon as it will be ready. The next meeting will be held in July 1998.

5. Support to the Belgian colleagues.
 At this point of the meeting Mr Delvoie read the text of the letter of support which he would have liked the EAJ to send to the general meeting of the Belgian judges. He said that it was not his intention to ask for a letter to be sent to  the authorities of his country; what he asked for was a letter of moral support addressed to the plenary assembly of the Belgian judicial power, which will study the topic of the independence of the judiciary. The assembly unanimously approved the text of the letter, which has been signed by the President of the EAJ as well as by the President of the IAJ.

4. General Discussion:
4.-1. the draft Universal Judge’s Charter of the IAJ;
 The President recalled to the delegates that both the English and the French versions of the draft universal judge’s charter had been sent to all the delegations. She added that the quality of the English text would be improved thanks to the assistance of the British colleague. The Presidency Committee, in its meeting of Madrid, has decided to fix the deadline of 15 June 1998 for the sending, on behalf of each association, of the proposals for amendment to the Secretariat General in Rome. She also recalled that in Oporto, after the vote on the amendments, the statute will form the object of a vote which will be a global one, and not article by article.
 The President opened the debate on the point, article by article.
 Art. 3. Mr Eidesen asked whether by the expression: “autonomous bodies which are representative of the judges” one must intend that the judges must constitute the totality, the majority, or even only part of these bodies and if these bodies can also include politicians or university professors. Mr Fricker pointed out that the same terms are envisaged in articles 10 and 14. Mrs Girard remarked that articles 4, 5, and 6 of the European Judge’s Charter speak of a “body which is representative of the judges and that is independent of any other authority”. She added that the Ibero-American Charter is much more precise and that it refers to the need for a majority of judges. In the drafting of the universal statute, one tried to combine the various statutes worked out within the IAJ by a more general text and a very broad definition which does not engage any obligation, since the systems vary from country to country and that there are various ways of representing judges.
 Art. 5. Mr Eidesen remarked that in the English text the word “decisions” appeared. He asked whether this word should be read as extensible also to the administrative activity. Mr Woratsch noticed that the phrase “in relation to the decisions a judge must make” does not appear in the French text. Mr Fricker proposed the following wording: “in relation to his or her adjudications”. Mr Bonomo recalled that one should not limit the article to the court orders and he cited the example of the activity of distribution of cases [by the head of a jurisdiction], which is not a jurisdictional activity, but which must nevertheless enjoy the same guarantees of independence and impartiality as the jurisdictional activity. Mrs Girard proposed to strike out the expression: “in relation to the decisions a judge must make”, in order to make the English text correspond to the French text. Mr Delvoie, Mr Fricker and Mr Eidesen retorted that, in this way, the text became too broad. They expressed the wish that the French text also contained the limitation to the matter of “decisions”. Mr Kriegk then proposed to add to the French text the expression: “having an incidence on the jurisdictional activity” or “which can have an incidence on the jurisdictional activity”. Mr Kriegk proposed also some grammatical corrections in the French text.
 Art. 8. Mr Eidesen said that the formulation of this article is not compatible with the system of his country. Mrs Girard replied that many articles do not correspond to various national realities; our statute should reflect only the general principles which are shared by our association. The President added that this article does not form part of the European Charter. Mr Fricker and Mr Knudsen expressed their agreement with Mr Eidesen. After a discussion on this topic, according to a proposal of Mr Delvoie, the assembly unanimously decided to approve the following proposal of amendment, by replacing the first subparagraph of art. 8 of the text by the following: “The judge must not carry out any other function, whether public or private, paid or voluntary, incompatible with his or her function of judge”. The second subparagraph of art. 8 will remain, on the other hand, as it is in the draft.
 Art. 9. Mr Eidesen said that the Norwegian delegation could not accept the formulation of this article, since the possibility of being member of political parties is an inalienable right of any citizen. Mr Voss said that also in Germany judges can be members of political parties. Mr Woratsch said that one cannot reconsider the work of the group which wrote the draft statute, it being impossible to have a statute compatible with all national legislations. Mrs Girard said that the topic of political neutrality had not been inserted in the European Charter; on the other hand, the statute of the Ibero-American judge contemplated this prohibition. She added that one must take into account that not all judges have the chance of living in countries of developed democracy.
 The President proposed an amendment which stated this principle of political neutrality in less rigid terms and which could, at the same time, be accepted by Europeans as well as by judges from other systems as a protection against political influence. Mr Voss declared himself against any prohibition for the judge to be member of a political party. Mr Fricker said that it was possible to envisage a prohibition for the judge to engage himself in political activity, but that freedom for the judge to express his political opinions must be maintained. Mr Markel said that the proposed wording fully respected the point of view of the Scandinavian colleagues, having regard to the reference to the cases “where this is authorised under the law and the constitution”. Mr Eidesen stressed that he was against this text, even after this possible modification. Mr Delvoie remarked that there was a divergence between the English and the French texts in the sense that only the first expressly excludes the right for a judge to be member of a political party.
 Mr Kriegk proposed the following modification of art. 9: “the judge cannot accomplish partisan activities throughout his function”. Mr Zappelli expressed his agreement with Mr Kriegk. Mr Eidesen did not agree with this amendment.
 Art. 10. Mr Kriegk said that the text contained a repetition, since - on one hand - it states that the judge is irremovable and - on the other hand - it provides that the judge is appointed for life. He proposed to replace the expression “for life” by the words: “without time limits”. Mrs Girard replied that this formulation had been adopted in consideration of the systems in which judges are appointed for a predetermined period of time.
 Art. 11. Mr Eidesen proposed to eliminate the second phrase of this article. Mrs Girard pointed out that this article corresponds to art. 4 of the European Charter. Mr Murphy expressed his agreement with Mr Eidesen. Mr Markel noted that this article corresponds perfectly to the principles drawn up by the Council of Europe. Mr Fricker expressed his agreement with Mr Eidesen. Mrs Girard pointed out that it was necessary to distinguish between the body responsible for the selection of judges and the body which signs the appointment decree. Mr Woratsch pointed out that a modification of text, such as the one proposed by the Norwegian colleague, would be in contrast with the declaration of support to the colleagues of the Czech Republic and of Slovakia, where it is the government which appoints judges and which takes all decisions relevant for their careers.
 Art. 12. Mr Eidesen expressed agreement with this text, which is in harmony with the system of his country. Mr Kiuru said that the proposed text does not correspond to art. 10 of the European Charter, which prohibits only a direct civil lawsuit against the judge. Mr Fricker proposed in the English text to replace the expression “official capacity” by the words “judicial capacity”. Mr Kriegk said that the article suggested the idea of an absolute civil immunity; he thus proposes to adopt the text of art. 10 of the European Charter. Mr Fricker and Mr Eidesen expressed the opinion to propose to the Presidency Committee to send  the text back to a new working group.
 Art. 13. Mrs Costiniu said that the Rumanian association would send an amendment on this article. Mr Eidesen expressed the fear that the text gives too broad a protection to judges; this provision should not confer a privilege to the judge. Mr Woratsch said that it was necessary to take account of the systems where judges need a particular protection, even on the penal level; he added that the representative of the Common Law systems in the working group did not raise remarks in this respect. Mr Delvoie said that the text proposed does not give to the judges any privilege  in comparison to any other citizens. Mr Eidesen replied that hisd country is not a country of Common Law and repeated his request that the project be sent back to the working group.
 Art. 14. Mr Kriegk proposed to replace in the French text the word “faits” by the word “raisons”. Mrs Costiniu asked what one must understand by “independent body”. Mr Woratsch answered that this expressions means any kind of body, provided that it is not the ministry of justice.
 Art. 15. Mr Kriegk said that it was necessary to add at the end of this article the following phrase: “and in particular to allow the judges to be consulted on their statute, as well as upon the means and the defence of justice “.
 Art. 16. Mr Lindenstrauss proposed to add, after the word “remuneration”, the words “and all other payment”. He said that Israel will propose an amendment on this subject.
 After the analysis of all the articles, and upon the request of Mr Eidesen, the assembly was called to vote the proposal to recommend to the Presidency Committee to send the draft statute back to a new working group and to invite this group to write another draft Universal Judge’s Charter. The result of the voting was the following: 7 voted in favour; 17 against; 4 abstentions. The proposal of the Norwegian delegate was thus rejected. Mr Fricker requested that the minutes of the meeting state his declaration as follows “The draft Universal Judge’s Charter contains some ideas which are contrary to the systems of some of  the countries represented in the IAJ”. The delegate of Norway supported this request.
 Closing the debate on this point Mrs Girard remarked that all associations agreed on the proposal for an amendment of art. 8; she also recalled that, in order to be admitted, the amendment proposals must be sent in writing to the Secretariat General in Rome before June 15, 1998.

4.-2 report upon the Amsterdam Treaty (Paul Broekhoven);
 Mrs Girard distributed a text containing the consolidated versions of the treaty on the European Union and of the Treaty Establishing the European Community. Mr Broekhoven submitted to the assembly a report on the contents of the new Treaty of Amsterdam. The text of his report is distributed as an enclosure and will be published on the journal “Euro Iustitia”. Mrs Girard expressed the wish that the working group on the penal matter, which will prepare the meeting of Paris in November 1998, reflect upon the possibility to prepare an amendment on the judicial control of the activities of Europol. She said she was certain that the members of the European Parliament would be interested in such a subject. The President also underlined that after the treaty of Amsterdam the role of the Court of Justice of the European Communities is reinforced, since it did not have before any competence on the subject of judicial co-operation, contemplated by the Third Pillar. This innovation must be greeted as a positive fact.

4.-3 the future working group upon the European Public Prosecutor;
 Mrs Girard reminded the participants that she had spoken in Puerto Rico about the need for creating a working group and had distributed a document referring to the “Corpus Juris” of Mrs Delmas Marty. This working group had not started its activity yet. The first step was then to see again which are the countries interested in this subject. The assembly decided that the group would be composed of the following delegations: Austria, Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands, Romania, Slovenia, Sweden and United Kingdom; the people interested  are: Mr Franke, Mr Henkes, Mr Lernout, Mrs Tratnik, Mr Walter; Italy, Romania and the United Kingdom will communicate to Mr Woratsch the names of the colleagues delegated to take part in this working group. This group will also deal with the preparation of the ENM conference of Paris in November 1998.

4.-4 the future possible way of working inside the EAJ.
 The President pointed out that in Puerto Rico the EAJ had decided to put on the agenda of this meeting the debate on the way of working of the EAJ. She thus gave the floor to the delegates. A very long and lively debate followed, during which Mr Fricker and Mr Carrick called for a broader circulation of documents and proposals before the meetings of the EAJ. Mr Carrick also said that the EAJ should not be interested in political subjects, such as those which are related to the bodies of the European Union. Mr Markel noted that the work of the EAJ Presidency had become heavier and heavier, and that therefore it would be necessary to create permanent “managing groups” specialised in different matters (civil, penal, etc.), in order to assist the President. Mrs Costiniu recommended that the other associations, especially the oldest, make each year a report on their activities and the legislative innovations of each country. Mr Voss said that it was time to give EAJ a defined structure and to amend the statute of the EAJ. Several delegates proposed the creation of a working group on this subject.
 At the end of the discussion the assembly decided to create an executive committee, charged to assist the President in the management of work. This committee will be composed of the two other members of the IAJ Presidency Committee, Mr Markel and Mr Broekhoven, as well as by Mrs Tratnik (also in the name of the countries of the PECO) and of Mr Knudsen (also in the name of Northern Europe and Common Law countries).
 In concluding the meeting the President convened the next meeting to be held in Oporto (Portugal) on September 6, 1998. She warmly thanked once again the Slovenian colleagues for the perfect organisation of the meeting and for their hospitality.

The President of the EAJ    The Secretary General of the IAJ
  Mrs Pâquerette Girard      Mr. Massimo Bonomo