Discussion on Strengthening the Courts & Improving the Fair Administration of Justice

1. Discussion on Strengthening the Courts & Improving the Fair Administration of Justice Presented by: The Honorable Bernice B. Donald U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

4. Comparing Uganda & U.S. Court Systems In the United States, there are two judicial systems: 1) federal and 2) state. Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. Federal courts hear criminal prosecutions brought by the United States government for violations of federal law and civil cases that either (a) arise under federal law or (b) arise under state law, but (i) “diversity of citizenship” exists and (ii) the amount in controversy is greater than $75,000.00.

5. The State Court System: Types of Cases Comparing Uganda & U.S. Court Systems The Federal Court System: Types of Cases Cases that deal with the constitutionality of a law. Cases involving the laws and treaties of the U.S. Cases involving Ambassadors and public ministers. Disputes between two or more states. Admiralty law. Bankruptcy. Most criminal cases, probate (involving wills and estates). Most contract cases, tort cases (personal injuries), family law (marriages, divorces, adoptions). Note that most (though not all) suits involving federal claims can also be heard in state courts. State courts are the final arbiters of state laws and constitutions. Their interpretation of federal law or the U.S. Constitution may be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court may choose to hear or not to hear such cases.

6. The State Court System: Selection of Judges Comparing Uganda & U.S. Court Systems The Federal Court System: Selection of Judges “Article III” judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. They hold office during good behavior, typically, for life. Through Congressional impeachment proceedings, federal judges may be removed from office for misbehavior. “Article I” judges (e.g., Magistrate Judges; Bankruptcy Judges). Method for appointment varies. State court judges are selected in a variety of ways, including: election, appointment for a given number of years, appointment for life, and combinations of these methods, e.g., appointment followed by election.

7. Comparing Uganda & U.S. Court Systems Structure of the Federal Courts • 1 - United States Supreme Court (9 justices) • 13 - United States Courts of Appeals • 94 - United States District Courts • United States Magistrate Judges also assist District Judges. • Other Courts: the United States Court of Claims (hears most claims against the United States); the United States Court of International Trade; the United States Bankruptcy Courts (units of the U.S. District Courts). • Courts Outside the Judicial Branch: the U.S. Tax Court; Military Courts; the Court of Veterans Appeals; federal administrative agencies and boards.

8. Comparing Uganda & U.S. Court Systems Structure of the Federal Courts: Trial Courts • U.S. District Courts have “original jurisdiction” over the overwhelming number cases filed in federal court. • The District Courts hear pretrial matters/motions, try the case (with or without a jury), and enter a final judgment. • An aggrieved party may then appeal to the Court of Appeals, usually the court of appeals for the geographical area in which the District Court sits. (Example of Exception – Appeals in patent cases are heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.) • In certain cases, the District Court acts as an appellate court. (E.g., Bankruptcy cases; appeals from administrative agency denials of Social Security benefits.)

9. Comparing Uganda & U.S. Court Systems

10. Comparing Uganda & U.S. Court Systems Structure of the Federal Courts: Courts of Appeals • Courts of Appeals – 12 regional circuits with a Court of Appeals, plus the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (which has nationwide jurisdiction). • E.g., the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit hears cases from Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, and Michigan. • Appellate review is generally limited to the evidence in the record created before the trial court (or the agency). • Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo, but questions of fact are reviewed with great deference to the findings of the lower court or tribunal. • Typically hear appeals in three-judge panels, except when entire court hears it “en banc” for special reasons.

11. Comparing Uganda & U.S. Court Systems Structure of the Federal Courts: U.S. Supreme Court • 1 Chief Justice and 8 Associate Justices. • Hears cases (from lower federal and state courts) at its discretion within the guidelines set by Congress. • Hears cases as an entire court (all 9 justices present). • Hears relatively few cases– usually only for very important issues.

12. Comparing Uganda & U.S. Court Systems • Example federal case: John Jones sues his former employer, XYZ Corporation, in U.S. District Court for employment discrimination in violation of federal law. • The parties will engage in discovery (interrogatories, requests for admission, and depositions). • Parties often file motions. Sometimes a motion may result in dismissal of the case. (E.g., motion for summary judgment). • If not otherwise resolved (i.e., by motion or settlement), the case will proceed to trial. The case may be heard by the judge or by a jury. • At trial, attorneys will present proof – usually in the form of testimony from live witnesses. Testimony may also be presented by deposition, which is testimony taken before the trial and preserved in writing or on video by a court reporter. • After the ruling/verdict, there may be post-trial motions. • An aggrieved party may appeal.

13. Comparing Uganda & U.S. Court Systems • Example federal case (continued): The aggrieved party has appealed from the judgment of the U.S. District Court. • The Court of Appeals may affirm, reverse, remand, vacate, affirm in part and reverse in part, etc. • The case may reach the U.S. Supreme Court if a party petitions for and receives a Writ of Certiorarifrom the Supreme Court. • If remanded, the District Court will engage in further proceedings, including a re-trial if necessary. Questions?

14. Comparing Uganda & U.S. Court Systems Similarities between the U.S. and Ugandan Judiciaries: • A supreme court as a final arbiter exercising appellate review. • Judicial review of the constitutionality of laws. • Use of a professional judiciary in most instances, particularly at the higher levels. (In the U.S., all federal judges are trained lawyers, though U.S. Supreme Court justices do not have to be.) • Legal system based on Anglo-American common law. • An element of duality: In the U.S., there exist both federal and state laws (and in certain cases, the federal courts are bound to apply state law). Does Uganda use both a common law system and a system of unwritten customary laws?

15. What differences do you perceive between the U.S. and Ugandan judicial systems?

16. Individual Dockets • Assignment of judge at case filing • Case remains with the same judge until conclusion • The judge is accountable for pace and resolution of the case • Equal distribution of workload • Infrequent re-assignments

17. Early Court Intervention • Meaningful deadlines for serving and responding to complaints • Initial case management conference and order

18. Early Court Intervention • Meaningful deadlines for serving and responding to complaints • Initial case management conference and order

19. Early Court Intervention • In the United States, within 120 days of service • Usually held shortly after answer (plea) is filed. • Before conference, parties meet and prepare case management plan. • Judge holds conference. • Judge issues case management order. • Possible application before appellate court.

20. Continuing Control of Case Progress • Hold parties to schedule • Periodic status conferences in complex cases • Promptly resolve disputes that could delay case • Promptly rule on motions (applications) • Promptly set final pretrial conference (if not already set) • Never reach a point where a court deadline is not in place

21. Maximizing Settlement Opportunities Before Trial • Parties must discuss settlement at first meeting • Set settlement discussion deadline in case management order • Court annexed mediation

22. Final Pretrial Conference • In the U.S., held after close of discovery and resolution of motions • Purpose: to create a binding plan for trial, set parameters. • Lawyers meet and prepare a proposed final pretrial order. • Final pretrial conference with court • Final pretrial order issued • High threshold for modifying order

23. Firm and Credible Trial Dates • When to set trials • Setting firm trial dates • Avoid granting continuances

24. Trial Management • Final pretrial order governs the trial • Hold parties to allotted time • Avoid trial interruptions • Lawyers submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law before trial • Prompt rulings • Manage post-trial events

25. Enforcement Tools • For lawyers • For parties • For witnesses or third parties

26. Effective Information and Reporting Systems • Individual Case Information • Docket information • Calendars – provide weekly or monthly to judge • Cases approaching or exceeding time goals

27. Effective Information and Reporting Systems • Courtwide caseload and performance • Individual judge statistics • With information systems, can set court-wide goals • Backlog reduction • Continuance rates

28. Criminal Case Management • Same principles apply • Individual dockets • Early court intervention • Continuing judicial control • Final pretrial conferences

29. Criminal Case Management • Other tools • Speedy trial rights • Discovery obligations • Plea bargaining

30. Judicial Time Management Suggestions • Do tasks once • Decide matters promptly • Use computers • Use standardized forms where possible • Have the parties and lawyers help you • Do not hold hearings on every issue or motion

31. Judicial Time Management Suggestions • Backlogs • Require status reports: dismiss the case if none is filed • Setting trials: roll call approach • Dismissal of unserved cases; demand for default application in cases where no response filed • Help from other judges on roll call

32. Court Governance • We live in an age of accountability and increasingly available information. People expect more services and deliberations more quickly and more efficiently at a lower cost.

33. Courts Must Be Public Service Oriented

34. Focus on the Mission

35. Committed Leadership & Court Members

36. Shared Responsibility for Strategic Plan Implementation

37. Set Performance Standards & Hold People Accountable

38. Transparency

39. Communication

40. Collegiality

41. Credibility

42. Integrity

43. “There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?” -- Robert F. Kennedy

44. Envision the Type of Court System that You & the People of Uganda Want