More About Innovations for Successful Societies By Malcolm Simmons

The tangled history of the judicial system turned the simplest matters into serious challenges. Attending trials could be difficult because courtrooms were sometimes hard to find and schedules were not easily accessible to the public. In addition, hearings and trials often took place in cramped offices with little or no public notice.
Tristan Dreisbach
Innovations for Successful Societies
Although law required most court sessions to be open to the public, in practice they were seldom accessible. Courtrooms for specific cases were sometimes difficult to find because of inadequate postings and signage. Few court buildings posted schedules showing locations and times of court sessions.
A particularly widespread problem arose from the penchant of many judges for performing judicial functions, including hearings and trials, in their private offices, behind closed doors, out of public sight, and in tight spaces that precluded attendance by anyone who had no specific role in a case. Many jud…

Innovations for Successful Societies By Malcolm Simmons

Influences such as the United Nations and the European Union
An October 2007 report by the UN Development Programme (UNDP) stated that only about 1 in 5 Kosovars surveyed expressed satisfaction with the court system and the prosecutor’s office—a rating lower than any other government institution’s.2
Xharra and her two civil society colleagues— Faik Ispahiu, who headed Internews, the media nongovernmental organization (NGO) that produced Xharra’s show, and Haki Abazi, a Kosovar who had joined the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, a New York–based foundation, in 2007— recognized the need to better know the problems affecting the courts and to repair the frayed relationship between the people and the judicial system. With little legal knowledge and no template to work from, the three looked for a window into courts.
Recent history had created the challenges that confronted the reformers in 2008. The relationship between international and local authorities was complex and confusing,…

Malcolm Simmons - Judicial Case Management Workshop

Maldives 2018
Presented by Judge Malcolm Simmons
What delegates have said about Malcolm Simmons:
“The most informative training I have ever attended” - High Court Judge, Serbia
“An excellent training” - Judge, Court of BiH, Bosnia & Herzegovina

This workshop is intended for judges, judicial assistants and court managers and will take a detailed look at the principles and techniques for Judicial Case Management.
The workshop will review the lessons learned from recent justice system reforms designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of judicial administration.
The workshop will also cover the scope of application and principles of judicial ethics. The workshops will cover: ·Understanding the purpose of Judicial Case Management; ·Active Judicial Case Management; ·Techniques for successful Judicial Case Management; ·Judicial Independence; ·Conducting a pre-trial review hearing and proactively monitor the progress of a case ·Making use of special measures for the vulnerable ·

What people are saying about Judge Malcolm Simmons?

What people are saying about Judge Malcolm Simmons?

“He is an exceptional and highly experienced lawyer.”
Circuit Judge, England & Wales
“A tenacious and formidable judge who prides himself on attention to detail, and is hard-working.”

Barrister, England & Wales
I recently attended a conference on criminal procedure presented by the eminent Judge Malcolm Simmons.

His presentation on judicial conduct was extremely revealing and covered some of the more salient features of judicial conduct and behaviour.

Judge Malcolm Simmons described ‘Judgecraft’ as the art of judging. It encompasses everything that you will not find in a book on law, evidence or procedure. Judgecraft is about how judges do their job and fair treatment and equality are at the heart of it.

A judge must free himself of prejudice and partiality and so conduct himself, in court and out of it, as to give no ground for doubting his ability and willingness to decide cases coming before him solely on their legal and factual m…