Performance-Based Budgeting and Management of Judicial Courts in France: an Assessment

Abstract

In conclusion, we must insist on the two main effects of the LOLF and the reforms that accompany it: First, a huge increase of management responsibilities for the chiefs of courts of appeal and the heads of the lower courts, without an allocation of means to adequately administer these time consuming responsibilities. (And knowing that the increased budget for the mission "judicial justice" primarily benefits the program "Penitentiary administration"). Second, the chiefs of courts have not gained a real autonomy in terms of management and budgetary decision making. Ultimately, the implementation of the LOLF results, for courts and regional administrative services, in an overload of managerial and administrative tasks, without additional human resources, even without efforts to train judges and clerks in order to enable them to deal adequately with their administrative and budgetary responsibilities. In this regard, there is good empirical evidence that the increase of administrative and managerial tasks performed by the judges is correlated with a higher duration of case processing, a worse clearance rate, and a lower quality of justice24.