On the preventive side, one of the tools is the annual EU Justice Scoreboard which has been providing comparable data on the independence, quality, and efficiency of national justice systems since 2013. In addition, the annual European Rule of Law Mechanism, with the annual Rule of Law Report at its centre, has been providing since 2020 a qualitative assessment of significant developments in the areas of justice, anti-corruption, media independence and institutional checks and balances in every Member State, including specific recommendations for all Member States, aiming to prevent challenges to the rule of law from emerging or deepening.

Gaining a better understanding on the implementation of international and EU standards and its impact on judicial independence is crucial to support the EU’s capacity to proactively promote rule of law, fundamental human rights, and democracy.

Reflecting on reform activities at national level and the complexity of national justice systems, proposals should contribute to improve the understanding of the functioning of the safeguards for judicial independence in each other’s justice systems. This can be achieved with a multidisciplinary research approach (including research in SSH disciplines), complementing the data and analysis gathered through the annual EU Justice Scoreboard and annual Rule of Law Report.

While using a multidisciplinary approach such as a socio-legal approach, proposals should compare and critically assess national frameworks for judicial independence. Special focus should be put on how national rules, covering e.g. the procedure regarding appointments, promotion and dismissals of judges and members of judicial administration bodies, workload assessment of judges, allocation of cases, disciplinary proceedings, and transfers of judges, work in practice.

Proposals should also contribute to building concrete knowledge on current legal practice, the statutory framework, leading court cases and major relevant developments at national level with up to date, reliable and comparable information in the Member states and in the enlargement countries.

Additionally, a comparative analysis on the independence, impartiality and integrity of judicial institutions across the EU could serve as a case to illustrate the rights to an effective remedy and fair trial, and also to strengthen accountability in the broad sense.

To support this goal, proposals should provide an outline for a comparative analysis of the safeguards for judicial independence in the Member States and, where appropriate, enlargement countries. Proposals should also highlight good practices on the implementation of international and EU rules and standards at national level.

Based on the research on the implementation of international and EU rules and standards at national level, policy recommendations could be developed to reflect on how judicial cooperation between the Member States could be strengthened.