Get to know the Draft Law in four steps:
What problems are the initiative intended to solve?
The biggest incident to solve is the slowdown of judicial proceedings. It seeks, on the one hand, to expedite judicial procedures so that they are carried out in a reasonable time; for another, enhance Mediation and the negotiating capacity of the parties to help conflicts be resolved through dialogue
What does the need for approval come from and why is it a vital opportunity?
The need to approve this Law arises from the aforementioned slowdown of the Justice system, incapable of responding to citizens' demands, within useful time periods, due to the saturation of the courts. This congestion will reach its maximum peak in a short period of time as a result of the COVID-19 crisis.. The Public Justice Service proposes in this way Mediation as a consensual means that can serve ordinary citizens to build dialogued and effective solutions.
What objectives does this standard have?
The first major objective is the development of dispute settlement systems. The aim is to recover the negotiating capacity of the parties to prevent the courts from continuing to receive huge amounts of litigation, amounts that they cannot cope with. As a proposal on the table: attend a pre-trial Mediation information session.
The second objective revolves around the modification of certain procedures in the ritual laws. They plan to introduce new features such as: issuance of oral judgments in civil lawsuits; the improvement and extension of the regulation of oral sentences in the social order and in the contentious-administrative order; and the implementation in the civil and social jurisdictional orders of the techniques of lawsuit-witness and extension of effects of sentences
The third and final objective pursued is the implementation of measures for digital transformation of the public service of Justice. This would help avoid unnecessary trips, from both citizens and professionals in the sector.
Possible alternative regulatory and non-regulatory solutions?
As specified in official documents: “The stated objectives require a modification of a large part of the procedural legal system, so there is no non-regulatory alternative in achieving them”
The Draft Law to Promote Mediation is increasingly a more palpable reality. As a new step towards its definitive consolidation, this measure will be raised to public consultation. It will collect the opinion and proposals for improvements from citizens, professionals, organizations and associations in the sector.
What is the deadline to participate and to what email should I send my proposals?
The opinions on the aspects raised in the questionnaire (which you can find a little below) will have a deadline of June 23, 2020. They must be sent to the following email: cabinet.se@mjusticia.es
What requirements must I meet to be able to send my recommendations?
You must specify the following sections:
• Name and surname and/or company name of the natural or legal person to subscribe to the allegations. The full name of the participating organization will be necessary (if applicable)
• Contact information: e-mail or telephone
• Clear indication in the “subject” field of the email that the e-mail refers to the Draft Mediation Law
The parts of the information that are sent, and that the interested person requires should be treated confidentially, must be specifically indicated.
In which sections will I be able to contribute my proposals?
The clarifications that you want to specify regarding the Preliminary Project may revolve around the following sections and questions:
Expediting deadlines
Conflict resolution through dialogue
Reform of procedural laws
Digitization
Other queries
Expediting deadlines
Considering the necessary streamlining that must be promoted in the Administration of Justice, which will become more necessary taking into account the forced paralysis that, due to the coronavirus pandemic in Spain, has led to the practice of judicial activity :
-
Do you consider it necessary to undertake comprehensive reforms in the field of justice on three large levels, different but complementary, aimed at: 1. Channeling the growing litigation through the implementation of a consensual route, alternative to the judicial one, that enables greater participation of citizens in the justice system; 2. Expedite judicial procedures already underway; and 3. Finally, implement new information and communication technologies in the Administration of Justice?
Conflict resolution through dialogue
Regarding the line of work aimed at promoting and strengthening an entire dispute settlement system whose objective is to achieve a negotiated solution to them:
-
Do you consider it appropriate to foster and intensify awareness that makes citizens aware of the possibilities they have to try to achieve, with the help of appropriate mechanisms, guarantees and professionals, a consensual and negotiated solution? to your own problems?
-
Do you agree that a system be regulated that encourages an attempt at prior negotiation between the parties before filing a civil lawsuit?
-
Do you agree that, even in cases of disputes that have reached judicial channels, the competent Judge or Court, in cases where it deems appropriate, can refer the parties to try to reach a negotiated settlement of the dispute?
-
Do you agree that in order to encourage and encourage the parties to a dispute to resort to these extrajudicial resolution mechanisms, the necessary incentives should be provided and adequate treatment sought for the unjustified refusal to try to find negotiated solutions prior to the process?
Reform of procedural laws
In relation to the intention to reform procedural laws in order to expedite lawsuits that are already being processed before Courts and Tribunals and those that are newly filed:
-
Do you consider it appropriate that, without diminishing or waiving the principles, rights and procedural guarantees that must be observed throughout the process, the measures to be adopted include not only those that are necessary to accelerate the processing of the procedures and their more efficient management? , but also those others that affect the scope of the resolution to be issued by Judges and Magistrates and seek to expedite the decision-making so that it takes place within a reasonable period of time?
-
In this case, are you in favor of the fact that, in some procedures and cases, and without any reduction in the fundamental right to effective judicial protection or the rigor with which the unavoidable duty to motivate sentences imposed by the Spanish Constitution must be observed, Is the power for sentences to be dictated by the judicial body by word of mouth regulated?
Digitization
In relation to greater use of information and communication technologies in the field of the Administration of Justice:
-
Do you consider that it is advisable for citizens to use identification and authentication tools that are equally secure but much more accessible and simpler than electronic signatures, so that they can relate to the Administration of Justice in the same way as Do they do it with others, such as the Tax Administration?
-
Do you think it is advisable to advance the use of telematic communications by courts and tribunals, even with natural persons, so that the majority of notifications are carried out in this way and leaving the use of paper as residual?
-
Do you think it is appropriate that there are statements and trials that can be held electronically as long as measures are adopted to guarantee security and the exercise of the litigants' right to defense is respected?
Other queries
Other queries raised are:
-
Given that, almost certainly, a good part of the litigation that will be generated in all areas of Law as a result of the economic and social crisis generated by the coronavirus pandemic in Spain will be characterized by presenting the same object or reason of being: Do you consider it appropriate that, to deal with this multitude of lawsuits relating to identical or very similar controversies, the procedural mechanisms for the extension of the effects of a final judgment and the so-called “ witness litigation”, already present in the contentious-administrative order, which provide the judicial body with instruments that allow expediting the processing of appeals of this nature and providing a prompt and uniform response to the phenomenon of mass litigation?
-
Do you share the need, in the field of family law, in which there is a special human and social sensitivity, to introduce more flexible and agile procedures to respond to the problems arising from the exercise of parental responsibilities in this context? time of health crisis?
-
Do you agree that a system be articulated by which legal guarantees are reinforced in auctions of assets seized by the Courts when debtors cannot meet their pecuniary responsibilities?
