1. The Framework for People-Centred Justice
This Chapter provides an introductory overview to the structure of the OECD Framework and the rationale and methodology used to develop it. It highlights the basic premises and definitions that underpin the Framework, work on which it builds, the consultation processes it has undergone before publication, and its potential to support countries as a policy tool for transformation towards people-centred justice systems. It also mentions instruments that could be developed in the future building on the Framework.
The Framework consists of four interdependent pillars with a unifying foundation. Each pillar includes a range of policy options, directions and considerations.
Leadership should clearly establish that the purpose of justice systems and their components is to ensure equal access to justice for all and to meet the legal and justice needs of society. Moreover, it should commit to a “culture” that flows from and supports that purpose. This Framework is built on the foundation of a people-centred culture1 with respect for the rule of law, fair treatment, the protection of fundamental rights, and the independence of the judicial power. To work towards a people-centred approach to justice, there needs to be a reference point to ensure that public institutions and reform efforts to focus on achieving that purpose. The foundation focuses on:
This pillar focuses on the design, establishment and maintenance of legal and justice service delivery, in line with 2019 OECD criteria for people-centred design and delivery of legal and justice services. For example, it deals with how the justice system focuses on people in identifying the legal and justice needs of society, the most vulnerable groups, the barriers they face to accessing justice, and levelling the playing field for all through the appropriate services. Sub-pillars include:
This pillar concerns the role of government and other key justice actors and governance enablers in establishing justice systems that are accessible and ensure legal and justice needs of people are effectively addressed. This pillar incorporates approaches to establishing whole-of-government systems; systems to ensure access to technology and to justice services; justice system simplification; and people-centred reorientation of justice services. Sub-pillars include:
partnerships and co-ordination, with an emphasis on whole-of-government and whole-of-justice system approaches
integrating an access to justice perspective into decision-making and regulatory reform
mechanisms and procedures for seamless transfer of information and for handling disputes
financing and investing in a full range of legal and justice services.
This pillar recognises the importance of strengthening people’s capabilities on both sides of the justice service delivery system. It considers how to empower people through co-designing and contributing to legal and justice needs identification and solutions, and through increasing capacity, legal literacy and awareness. This pillar also includes developing the capabilities of those working in the justice sector to design and deliver people-centred legal and justice services, engaging with non-governmental and private providers, and communication and outreach strategies. Sub-pillars include:
This pillar focuses on establishing and maintaining evidence-based mechanisms to support decision making, delivery and monitoring of people-centred justice services. It covers the establishment of processes, governance and infrastructure to ensure that key data are available; that systems of ongoing evaluation exist to fill the gaps in what is known about what works cost-effectively to improve access to justice for individuals and specific groups; and to ensure accountability and progress can be monitored by governments through an appropriate range of indicators. Sub-pillars include:
The world we live in is a “law thick” world (Hadfield, 2010[1]): all aspects of life are impacted by laws, regulations, rights and responsibilities. From the moment a person is born, through education, housing, employment, transport, health, to the end of life, the law impacts their day-to-day life and economic and social well-being. As such, legal and justice needs are common in the lives of most people3. Addressing legal and justice needs demands access to public justice services and other dispute resolution mechanisms in order to recognise and obtain a remedy to the legal need in question, thus giving place to justice needs. The ability of the legal and justice system to effectively respond and address those needs for all people and generate fair outcomes is critical to ensure well-being, equal opportunity and access to public services. Conversely, the inability of justice systems to prevent or resolve people’s legal issues can weaken the social contract and lead to unresolved grievances, instability, or even violence.
Similarly, companies are affected by law in their daily operations, and their competitiveness can be promoted or curtailed by the extent to which their legal and justice needs are being met. A safe and thriving investment climate, vital for business development, must also be underpinned by a strong legal system able to secure contracts and property rights. Indeed, OECD research shows that accessible and effective justice has the potential to prevent the losses to GDP caused by unresolved legal issues, which are estimated to be between 0.5% and 3% of GDP in a majority of countries (OECD/WJP, 2019[2]).
Yet, despite significant advances in the efficiency of justice in many OECD and partner countries in recent years, there remain many challenges to ensuring justice systems’ responsiveness and effectiveness. Globally, according to estimates by the Task Force on Justice, more than 5.1 billion people lack meaningful access to justice (Task Force on Justice, 2019[3]). This figure has most likely increased as a result of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic (Langen, 2020[4]), which has unleashed the worst health, economic and social crisis since the Second World War (Johns Hopkins University & Medicine, 2020[5]).
In addition, despite early signs of recovery from the economic shocks triggered by COVID-19, the recent wave of social protests across the globe revealed concerns over limited transparency, relevance and accessibility of justice systems. The protests also highlighted uneven trust in justice as the ultimate guarantor of people’s rights4, which can also undermine the trust in other public institutions and hence the qualities of democracies.5 In addition, there are ongoing concerns over possible systemic (conscious or unconscious) biases in justice systems.
This puts increasing pressure on countries, to achieve justice for all by putting people at the centre of justice systems, services and policies; to enable institutions to respond effectively and credibly to the needs of all people; and to contribute to fair outcomes and just societies6. As such, genuine equal access to justice– to ensure fair opportunities and outcomes for all, free of bias and discrimination – is fundamental to protect the social contract, uphold the rule of law and foster public trust in public institutions (Box 1.1).
The term “democratic state under the rule of law” means a state where people elect their own leaders, a state where government itself is bound by the law and helps ensure that the law is respected in the relations between people. The law guarantees everyone’s individual freedoms against contraventions by government or other people. This can only happen if the legislature, executive and judiciary are separate. And a crucial element is an independent court system which is truly accessible to the citizen. (Corstens, 2017[6])
“The rule of law is a common golden thread in the fabric of every liberal democracy” (Corstens, 2017[6]). The rule of law serves as a “basic value and a foundation of good governance” (OECD, 2019[7]) and protects many if not all of the core underlying values that allow for a functioning liberal society (trust, the role of police and public safety, a functioning criminal justice system rather than individuals taking the law into their own hands, political freedom, democracy, the end of corruption, enabling sound business and economic environments, etc.). These values and characteristics are the bedrock upon which a people-centred justice system can operate and, as Corstens writes, “we know of no better model than a democracy under the rule of law to achieve those aims”.
Essential to the rule of law is judicial independence. Judges should not be subject to inappropriate influence, and individual judges must be free from any pressure that could affect their impartiality or the way they perform their duties.7 This judicial independence underpins the rule of law – which in turn underpins a people-centred justice system.
The rule of law has long been recognised as crucial for economic growth and prosperity. The link between rule of law, access to justice and economic development is now abundantly clear (OECD/WJP, 2019[2]) (Pathfinders, World Justice Project, OECD, 2021[8]). Efficient and non-corrupt institutions for the administration of justice, predictability of legal outcomes, protection of private property rights and maintenance of stability are absolute preconditions for stable government and a supportive investment environment; they are thus essential for growth. In terms of development in particular, there is little chance for effective reform if inefficient and corrupt governments and institutions erode achievements made through development programmes. A functioning rule-of-law justice system contributes to a thriving business environment and longer-term investment decisions. It instils confidence in the system by ensuring fair competition and protecting rights. OECD work has regularly highlighted the importance of the rule of law and an effective justice system for economic growth (OECD/WJP, 2019[2]) (Palumbo, 2013[9]).
A practically universal component of definitions of the rule of law is the requirement “for people, institutions and companies to have easy access to the courts” (Corstens, 2017[6]). Yet legal and justice needs studies have also established that the everyday legal and justice needs experienced by most people never reach a courtroom. This would imply that the rule of law – when understood as incorporating true access to justice and a people-centred approach – needs to be viewed as much broader than access to courts. In settling disputes on the basis of law, providing legal protection, and interpreting legislation, these courts can be said to constitute “the shadow of the law” by which day-to-day activities occur. Yet they are not fully sufficient for the establishment and maintenance of a people-centred justice system able to fully respond to the needs of people in a cost-effective way. Justice system reforms in many OECD member countries have therefore been establishing a range of out-of-court and/or digital pathways and solutions. The OECD Criteria for people-centred design and delivery of legal and justice services (see the Annex A) recognise a continuum of services ranging from least interventionist (provision of legal information, legal assistance or alternative dispute resolution mechanisms) to litigation in courts. This Framework thus elaborates on the people-centred justice elements by incorporating of a more comprehensive understanding of the rule of law.
With the adoption of the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (2030 Agenda) and its Sustainable Development Goals in 2015, UN countries have committed to “Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels”. One of the four targets contributing to SDG 16 (UN, 2015[10]) is: “promot(ing) the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensur(ing) equal access to justice for all” (target 16.3). This target directly links the rule of law and access to justice for all.
Taken together, results of legal needs surveys suggest that in broad terms, there is a gap between the main public justice services and services that would be best suited to meet the everyday legal and justice needs of society (OECD/Open Society Foundations, 2019[11]). Research also suggests that many people face a range of barriers to access justice, such as cost, complexity, lack of language skills, remoteness and discrimination.
Justice services also often remain fragmented or inadequate. In many jurisdictions there is no fully developed continuum of options for identifying, anticipating, preventing and resolving legal issues, often owing to weak referral and triage systems among the institutions involved. The focus on court and litigation-centred “silo” models can further undermine the ability of justice systems to enable access to justice for all.
Making progress towards SDG target 16.3 requires countries to move towards ensuring that all people and communities have access to justice services that are of high quality, appropriate, targeted, timely and cost-effective. Historically, however, many justice pathways have been designed from a provider perspective. Codes and procedures regulating litigation, for example, are still often written from the court’s perspective. In contrast, people-centred pathways imply 1) understanding people’s needs and 2) securing a level-playing field for access to justice through the development and implementation of policies and services that provide remedies to legal issues and remove barriers to access.
The importance of transforming justice to centre on people was acknowledged in the 2018 Riga Statement on “Investing in Access to Justice for All!”, adopted by high-level participants of the 4th OECD Policy Roundtable on Equal Access to Justice.8 The statement strongly recommended that action be taken to invest in access to justice for all to foster inclusive growth and implement the 2030 Agenda. It emphasised the importance of measuring progress in access to justice from the people’s perspective and called on the international community to develop tools to support countries’ efforts to better understand and address legal and justice needs. The statement also called for a deeper understanding of the needs of disadvantaged people who face particular barriers in accessing justice. It highlighted the importance of innovative approaches in the delivery of people-centred justice services to meet diverse legal and justice needs and empower individuals, communities and businesses. Participants called for concerted action at the local, national and global levels to achieve equal access to justice for all, specifically for women, Indigenous communities and vulnerable groups. In parallel, the OECD criteria for people-centred design and delivery of legal and justice services (see the Annex A) underlined the importance of anchoring equality and inclusion, accessibility and availability within the foundation and underlying policy orientation of justice systems. .
These calls were echoed during high-level meetings9 and related OECD Global Equal Access to Justice Roundtables10 (OECD, 2021[12]), as well as other global events and declarations. The latter have included The Hague Declaration;11 a ministerial roundtable at the Open Government Partnership Global Summit in Ottawa; the launch of the Justice for All report (Task Force on Justice, 2019[3]); and, in the context of the 2020 Global Justice Week, the Global Dialogue of Justice Leaders (October 2020). The chair statement, delivered by the Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, underscored the commitment stated by participants during the meeting to intensify efforts to understand, solve, and prevent people’s justice problems, and to using justice to help people participate fully in their societies and economies. It emphasised the importance of having strong justice systems that leave no one behind and support those who face systemic barriers (Chair of the Global Dialogue of Justice Leaders, 2020[13]).
To this end, and as part of the OECD Initiative on Reinforcing Democracies, the present People-Centred Justice Framework aims to support countries in implementing their commitments and facilitate justice transformation by outlining elements for a government-wide strategy, inter-agency co-operation and communication, and mechanisms to ensure accountability and sustainability. It also plans to provide policy advice to specific countries to help advance people-centred justice. The Framework recognises the many challenges facing OECD members and other countries in this regard, including policy and practical implementation issues.
In particular, the Framework aims to:
develop a comprehensive vision for justice systems that is people-centred and integrated across sectors
highlight the key leadership role of state institutions in leading the transition to people-centred justice systems
support countries in achieving people-centred justice transformation through identification of core principles, building on the OECD criteria for people-centred design and delivery of legal and justice services
showcase good practice examples and highlight policy considerations for achieving equitable and people-centred justice
provide the foundation for monitoring and accountability guides and indicators to assist governments in their transition to people-centred justice systems.
It is also relevant to highlight what the Framework is not. This Framework does not provide guidance regarding the detailed structure and governmental constraints required to ensure an independent judiciary free of external influences, nor to guarantee the rule of law. It also does not focus extensively on ensuring high quality judgments. Instead, it provides guidance for the delivery of public justice services to people in the best manner, resting on the assumption that a sound judiciary and equality before the law are required to make this possible.
The Framework is based on good practices, experience and evidence gained recently in OECD and partner countries, and informed by related global policy commitments and regional strategies and initiatives in the area of access to justice, strengthening the responsiveness and people-centricity of justice systems. The Framework is also integrating key findings and themes emerging from OECD work on justice systems since 2015. It informed by lessons from people-centred approaches in the health sector, as called for by participants of the OECD Global Roundtables on access to justice. It builds upon and complements existing international and regional standards on sound justice policy and governance (see Annex A). A wide-ranging consultation with experts at the global, regional and national levels will serve to further refine the Framework.
Learning from the health sector
The growing attention paid to a “people-centred” approach to legal and justice needs and justice reform over the past two decades has led to wide recognition of the value of learning from other sectors – especially health (Box 1.2). In many ways, health internationally has chartered an important trajectory – focusing increasingly on the needs of people rather than “disease”; on appropriate investment in rigorous research and evaluation; and on investment in and use of data. Quantitative development of people-centred indicators in the health system aims to support the design and delivery of health services that truly involve patients in the decision-making process. The discipline of epidemiology, which uses data to study the distribution and determinants of health and disease conditions, has risen to global prominence during the current pandemic. In many if not most countries the health (and other human service) infrastructures are much larger and well established than are legal aid and legal assistance infrastructures. Legal and justice systems could benefit from similar approaches, for example providing legal care that requires prevention, education and regular check-up strategies to ensure the population’s “legal health”.
In 2006, OECD Health Working Paper No. 23 defined “patient-centredness” as follows:
In the healthcare context, patient-centredness can be defined as “the degree to which a system actually functions by placing the patient/user at the centre of its delivery of healthcare and is often assessed in terms of patient’s experience of their healthcare. (Kelley and Hurst, 2006[14])
Subsequently the World Health Organization (WHO) distinguished between patient-centred care and people-centred care:
People-centred care … is focused and organized around the health needs and expectations of people and communities rather than on diseases. People-centred care extends the concept of patient-centred care to individuals, families, communities and society. Whereas patient-centred care is commonly understood as focusing on the individual seeking care – the patient – people-centred care encompasses these clinical encounters and also includes attention to the health of people in their communities and their crucial role in shaping health policy and health services.12
In 2015 the WHO issued its global strategy on people-centred and integrated health services. It defined people-centred services as follows:
People-centred health services are an approach to care that consciously adopts the perspectives of individuals, families and communities, and sees them as participants as well as beneficiaries of a new vision for service delivery trusted health systems that respond to their needs and preferences in humane and holistic ways. People-centred care requires that people have the education and support they need to make decisions and participate in their own care. It is organized around the health needs and expectations of people rather than diseases, (…) health services that are managed and delivered in a way that ensures people receive a continuum of health promotion, disease prevention, diagnosis, treatment, disease management, rehabilitation and palliative care services, at the different levels and sites of care within the health system, and according to their needs throughout their life course. (World Health Organization, 2015[15])
Evolution to people-centred justice
The application of people-centred concepts to justice systems is relatively new. First appearing as ‘client-centred’ services in the early 2000s, a number of similar and/or related terms have been used – including citizen-centred, person-centred, human-centred and people-centred design. It is necessary to define these terms in the attempt to define “people-centred access to justice”, and it is important to note that other sectors, such as health, have a longer and deeper history in the application of similar concepts (Box 1.3).
For over 20 years, justice systems have been called upon to focus on meeting the legal and justice needs from the citizen’s or person’s perspective. The calls have paralleled or followed similar movements for reform in other fields.
Client-centred – Early articulations often referred to a “client-centred” approach, possibly implying a focus on those who actually seek assistance (or receive assistance) from justice services. While commonly used in contexts where attention is focused on the actual clients of a particular service, there was growing recognition of the need for broader terminology, acknowledging – possibly as a result of the evolution of legal and justice needs research and legal needs surveys (LNSs) in particular – that the majority of people experiencing legal need do not use formal justice services and processes.
Citizen-centred – While much wider than “client-centred”, a citizen-centred scope suggested that some groups within the community (such as temporary residents, refugees, asylum seekers, etc.) were excluded from access to justice. Importantly, however, the concept of a “citizen” did convey a sense of government obligation – to its people – to provide appropriate access to justice.
People-centred – “People-centred” is now widely used. The underlying intent is to promote a justice system that indeed puts people at the centre and has as its purpose and design the goal of equally meeting the needs of all people of that jurisdiction, by enabling their effective participation and engagement in the process. People-centred is sometimes used interchangeably with “person-centred” but it is important to distinguish between the two terms. Whereas “person-centred” generally reflects a justice system and processes that are appropriate and suitable to the hypothetical individual “person”, “people-centred” aims to additionally evoke the responsibility of governments and their justice systems to be designed and established to meet the needs of not only people but also diverse groups of residents, refugees and visitors to an equal standard.
Human-centred design – It is also important to distinguish “people-centred” and older terms from what has come to be called “human-centred” design (for legal help). This term concerns designing processes (in this context, legal processes) and systems that are most appropriate for human beings as users or clients. A person-centred justice system must certainly include such design features for processes within that system, including taking into account insights from behavioural science. However, human-centred design can equally be applied to strategies and processes that are not necessarily in and of themselves directed towards a people-centred justice system. For example, human-centred design may be used to improve certain formal justice system processes without first asking the question whether or not that process is appropriate for a people-centred justice system in the first place.
In certain instances, citizen-centred can be interpreted more broadly to meet the needs of all people – people and others – within a jurisdiction, as with people-centred. In such cases, that context must be made clear.
Making change happen
The Framework recognises different historical, institutional and legal contexts across OECD member and partner countries, and that any transformation efforts would build on the existing structures and processes in justice systems. It also recognises that the commitment to leave no one behind in accessing justice, and transformation towards a people-centricity of justice, may include shifts in existing structures (e.g. merging of institutions, creation of agencies), strategies, systems, processes or policies. These changes could be political in nature and require a reform mindset. As such, the Framework aims to establish a holistic foundation that will help policy makers to think strategically and systemically to build adaptive, agile and flexible justice systems. Equally, it seeks to equip them with examples and policy options to design adaptations tailored to countries’ own context, opportunities and challenges.
To provide policy makers with further practical implementation guidance in different contexts, as the next step it is envisaged to develop a practical toolkit (or a series of toolkits) with a maturity model that would recognise the diversity of experiences, stakeholders and justice system models found across OECD membership. The toolkit(s) would aim to help policy makers navigate a transformation process in a practical way by providing them with the necessary evidence, tools and suggestions. Because people-centred transformation is most often incremental and takes place overt time, the toolkit(s) would also suggest concrete actions along different ladders, rising with each level commitment to people-centricity. With each step progress would be tracked and actions selected that are most relevant and useful to the particular justice system, in order to effectively produce positive outcomes. Over time, practical tools and indicators would be added to the kit.
The content of this Framework is the result of multiple information-gathering processes, involving the following:
The 2021 OECD Global Roundtable on People-Centred and Accessible Justice (30-31 March) – attended by over a hundred ministry of justice officials, partner international organisation representatives and thematic experts – dedicated a specific session to presentation of the Framework, and several other sessions to diving deeper into topics that would form fundamental components of the Framework’s pillars. Past Roundtables that have taken place annually since 2015 and related activities in member and partner countries and globally (including those organised by partner organisations) also served as foundations.
The Technical Consultation on the OECD Framework for People-Centred Justice, open to OECD member states, representatives from partner organisations including the United Nations, the World Bank, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the World Justice Project, the Pathfinders for Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies, and the Overseas Development Institutes among others, as well as several academic experts (February 2021). Valuable comments were also received in writing following the Consultation.
OECD/Open Society Foundations (2019), Legal Surveys and Access to Justice.
OECD (2019), Equal Access to Justice for Inclusive Growth: Putting People at the Centre.
OECD (2019), Criteria for people-centred design and delivery of legal and justice services (see Annex A).
OECD/WJP (2019), “Building a business case for access to justice”, White Paper.
OECD and Law and Justice Foundation of New South Wales Australia (LJFNSW) (2020), Brief on “Access to justice and the COVID-19 pandemic”.
OECD (2020) “Access to justice and the COVID-19 pandemic: Compendium of country practices”.
The extensive body of international knowledge and research developed on the legal and justice needs of people (e.g. by LJF of NSW Australia, The Hague Institute for Innovation of Law [HiiL], the Canadian Civil Justice Forum, World Justice Projects and other significant research done in Colombia, the United Kingdom, the United States and many other countries) and justice for all (e.g. Justice for All report by the Task Force on Justice).
The Framework also takes into account lessons learned from the OECD work on public governance, service improvement (e.g. health services, policy for business and entrepreneurship) and other policy areas (e.g. inequality and well-being, inclusive growth, small and medium enterprises), building on multi-disciplinary data and analysis.
References
[13] Chair of the Global Dialogue of Justice Leaders (2020), “Global Dialogue of Justice Leaders, 20 October 2020, Chair Statement”, https://bf889554-6857-4cfe-8d55-8770007b8841.filesusr.com/ugd/6c192f_c146e64ab7654bfe97830231d8b3daf0.pdf.
[6] Corstens, G. (2017), Understanding the Rule of Law, Hart Publishing.
[1] Hadfield, G. (2010), “Higher Demand, Lower Supply? A Comparative Assessment of Legal Resource Landscape for Ordinary Americans”, Fordham Urban Law Journal 37/1..
[5] Johns Hopkins University & Medicine (2020), COVID-19 Dashboard, https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html.
[14] Kelley, E. and J. Hurst (2006), “Health Care Quality Indicators Project: Conceptual Framework Paper”, OECD Health Working Papers, No. 23, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/440134737301.
[4] Langen, M. (2020), “Justice For All ahd the Economic Crisis”, https://cic.nyu.edu/publications/justice-all-and-economic-crisis.
[12] OECD (2021), OECD Access to Justice Roundtables website, http://www.oecd.org/governance/global-roundtables-access-to-justice/.
[7] OECD (2019), Strengthening The Rule of Law: Making the case, OECD, https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/stakeholder_contribution_on_rule_of_law_-_oecd.pdf.
[16] OECD (2015), “Serving Citizens Framework”, https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/gov_glance-2015-55-en.pdf?expires=1631617699&id=id&accname=ocid84004878&checksum=227D08D8CB043538CB93EAA9F4BC053E.
[11] OECD/Open Society Foundations (2019), Legal Needs Surveys and Access to Justice, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/g2g9a36c-en.
[2] OECD/WJP (2019), “White Paper: Building a business case for access to justice”, https://www.oecd.org/gov/building-a-business-case-for-access-to-justice.pdf.
[9] Palumbo, G. (2013), Judicial Performance and its Determinants: A Cross-Country Perspective, OECD, https://www.oecd.org/economy/growth/FINAL%20Civil%20Justice%20Policy%20Paper.pdf.
[8] Pathfinders, World Justice Project, OECD (2021), Grasping the Justice Gap: Opportunities and Challenges for People-Centered Justice Data Paper.
[3] Task Force on Justice (2019), Justice for All – Final Report, New York: Center on International Cooperation, https://bf889554-6857-4cfe-8d55-8770007b8841.filesusr.com/ugd/90b3d6_746fc8e4f9404abeb994928d3fe85c9e.pdf.
[10] UN (2015), United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal16.
[15] World Health Organization (2015), WHO global strategy on people-centred and integrated health services: interim report, World Health Organization, https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/155002.
Notes
← 1. People centricity” means taking the needs and voices of people into account when designing, delivering, implementing and evaluating public policies and services. People-centred services are inclusive, tailored to people’s needs and high quality (OECD, 2015[16]). This differs from justice systems whose reforms are primarily inspired by the needs or views of the service providers.
← 2. The OECD is grateful for the significant contribution to this document made by Geoff Mulherin, Director, Law and Justice Foundation, New South Wales, Australia, and for comments made by representatives of OECD member countries and experts from partner institutions during the technical consultation on 26 February 2021 and the OECD Global Roundtable on Equal Access to Justice on March 30-31st 2021.
← 3. This Framework for People-centred justice and the accompanying Principles focus primarily on non-criminal matters. For the purposes of these documents, a legal need refers to a problem with a legal dimension in various sectors (e.g. health, social, business, family and neighbourhood), whether or not this is recognised by those facing them. In turn, addressing legal and justice needs demands access to public justice services and other dispute resolution mechanisms in order to recognise and obtain a remedy to the legal need in question, thus giving place to justice needs. The laws and regulations play a vital role in driving the sound operations and legitimacy of various sectors, including health, employment, education, housing, and entrepreneurship – that people encounter on a daily basis. This means that potential needs and disputes are ubiquitous and flow from everyday life. In contrary to the conventional understanding of justice systems driven by criminal law, the majority of legal issues people face are of a civil and administrative nature. Some of the most prevalent legal and justice needs across countries globally include: disputes related to consumer issues, neighbour affairs, debts and contract enforcement, family, housing, employment, social safety net assistance and nationality. Unlike facing criminal procedure, many people do not recognise the legal dimension of their civil problems; have difficulties to precisely define it; and encounter multiple and compounded barriers in accessing justice. Furthermore, there is substantial evidence that both legal and social issues tend to trigger others, having a cascading and clustering effect. In this context, responsiveness of justice systems to those needs would include the design and delivery of services, which would enable most effective, appropriate and affordable resolution of disputes. The ability of justice systems to respond to legal and justice needs should be interpreted to provide appropriate access and quality of service to enable a timely and fair resolution of disputes (without prejudice to the actual substantive outcome of cases).
← 4. https://530cfd94-d934-468b-a1c7-c67a84734064.filesusr.com/ugd/6c192f_f06d74862b5949d9b09c3f32ed45fa98.pdf (accessed 21 August 2021).
← 5. www.oecd-ilibrary.org/trust-and-access-to-justice_5jg0174l4h26.pdf (accessed 21 August 2021).
← 6. Access to justice concerns the ability of people to obtain just resolution of legal and justice needs and enforce their rights, in compliance with human rights standards. It extends beyond formal resolution processes to include a full spectrum of services counting informal and alternative dispute resolution methods.
← 7. https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2016)007-e (accessed 21 August 2021).
← 8. www.oecd.org/gov/equal-access-to-justice-roundtable-latvia-riga-statement.pdf (accessed 22 August 2021).
← 9. For example, the 2019 World Justice Forum and 2019 High-Level Conference on Ending Violence against Women.
← 10. www.oecd.org/governance/global-roundtables-access-to-justice/events/ (accessed 22 August 2021).
← 11. The Declaration on Equal Access to Justice for All by 2030 was adopted at the Ministerial Roundtable on Access to Justice, hosted by H.E. Sigrid Kaag, Minister for Foreign Trade and International Cooperation of the Netherlands, in the Peace Palace in The Hague on 7 February 2019. Available at https://bf889554-6857-4cfe-8d55-8770007b8841.filesusr.com/ugd/90b3d6_9357f6ca843f452db89b671b1675524e.pdf (accessed 22 August 2021).