Last week, Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs Liisa Pakosta (Eesti 200) circulated a draft proposal on court reform to relevant stakeholders, noting that court workloads continue to increase and case resolution times are getting longer. The proposed changes aim to make the court system more efficient, higher in quality and faster.

Currently, Estonia has four district courts — Harju, Tartu, Viru and Pärnu — as well as the Tallinn and Tartu administrative courts and the Tallinn and Tartu circuit courts.

Workloads vary between regions, resulting in different case processing times for cases of similar nature in different courts. For example, the average processing time for civil cases at Viru District Court last year was 97 days, compared to 134 days at Harju District Court. Processing times for criminal and administrative cases also differ from court to court.

"The current court system lacks the flexibility to quickly respond to changes in workload and to meet society's expectation for efficient judicial proceedings," the draft states.

According to the proposal, one way to achieve more balanced workloads among judges in different regions would be to merge courts of the same level, thereby eliminating regional jurisdiction. Cases would instead fall under the jurisdiction of a single national court.

This would mean merging Harju, Viru, Tartu and Pärnu district courts into one district court for all of Estonia, handling both civil and criminal cases. Judges would be appointed to the district court as a whole but would retain their permanent place of service and location in the existing courthouses.

Each judge would handle their assigned cases based on their specialization, regardless of their permanent place of service. The existing courthouses would remain in use. Such a system is intended to ensure a more balanced workload for judges handling criminal cases and to allow for narrower specialization.

Under the draft, Tallinn and Tartu administrative courts would also be merged, leaving Estonia with a single administrative court. Those seeking to engage with the court could do so through courthouses in Tallinn, Tartu or Jõhvi.

The Tallinn and Tartu circuit courts would likewise be merged and new sectoral panels would be established: a civil panel, a criminal panel and an administrative panel, with each circuit judge assigned to one of these panels.

According to the draft, merging courts of the same type would require the development of a new model for managing court operations. District, administrative and circuit courts would establish a court presidium to act as the court's governing body.

The draft also presents an alternative solution: instead of merging the courts, cases could be reassigned to different courts for resolution without changing jurisdiction. In this scenario, the current court system would remain intact, but workloads would be balanced by distributing certain types of cases among different district or administrative courts.

Substitute judges could help manage workload

In addition to the previously outlined proposals, the draft also suggests creating a substitute judge system, as the current system is unable to cope with sudden increases in workload. A substitute judge would be a first- or second-tier judge appointed for a fixed term when there is a temporary surge in workload. For example, retired judges or those who have voluntarily left service could serve as substitute judges.

Another issue highlighted in the document is that, under the current system, a judge suffering from health problems can only be dismissed at their own request. However, the court system should have the ability to assess the physical and mental health of judges and if a judge's condition hinders their ability to work, the Supreme Court en banc should have the authority to dismiss them without their consent.

The draft also proposes strengthening judicial oversight and disciplinary responsibility and ending security checks for judicial candidates — such checks would only be conducted for candidates whom the full bench of the Supreme Court has already recommended to the president for appointment.

The institution of lay judges would be abolished due to several practical problems. For instance, lay judges currently have no clear restrictions on activities outside the courtroom and there is no oversight or background checks in place. In longer criminal proceedings, there is a significant risk that a lay judge could drop out before the case concludes, potentially requiring the entire process to restart, during which time offenses could expire.

As an alternative, the ministry suggests allowing lay judges to participate only in certain types of first-tier criminal cases.

Judges unhappy with the plan

Judges from Harju District Court have informed the Ministry of Justice that the proposal to merge Estonia's four district courts leaves unanswered the question of how this would lead to cost savings. In their view, all the goals cited as reasons for creating a single district court have already been achieved under the current system.

According to the judges, the court system is already operating at one and a half times its intended capacity and merely redistributing cases will not solve this problem.

"As far as we know, there has been no analysis of whether merging courts would result in increased costs or savings. Nor is there an analysis of how courts would be able to offer better services or how management quality would improve. In addition, it is unclear whether this plan is in compliance with the Constitution," said the Harju District Court judges, who argue that dismantling a functioning system would only make the court system more expensive.

Judges from the Tartu Circuit Court are also opposed to the creation of a single circuit court. In their view, the plan is clearly unconstitutional and would diminish access to justice in South Estonia.

"Separate circuit courts ensure regional balance in the administration of justice and allow the court system to take into account the specific characteristics of different regions. However, with a single nationwide circuit court, there would likely be pressure to centralize judicial proceedings in Tallinn to achieve efficiency," they stated.

According to the Tartu judges, merging the circuit courts would not lead to greater specialization among judges. Judges being stationed in different parts of Estonia and holding virtual meetings would not foster cohesive teamwork or direct communication.

"Moving case discussions to Teams may not be sufficiently secure and could pose a risk of compromising confidential information," the judges added.

Court leaders have also provided feedback. Pärnu District Court Chief Justice Toomas Talviste, Harju District Court Chief Justice Liina Naaber-Kivisoo, Tartu District Court Chief Justice Marek Vahing, Tartu Circuit Court Chief Justice Tiina Pappel and Acting Chief Justice of Viru District Court Angelina Abol have all expressed criticism of the plan.

They pointed out that the Courts Administration Council approved a court development plan through 2030 last December, which does not envision a single-court model. They said it was surprising that such a significant issue has been included in the coalition agreement without first establishing the courts' positions.

The court leaders also noted that, according to an impact analysis commissioned by the Supreme Court, the single-court model is clearly in conflict with the Constitution.

They argue that a single-court model would reduce access to justice in less populated areas, while judicial proceedings, resources and personnel would become increasingly concentrated around the court's central leadership. They added that it would not improve the quality of justice, would not be cost-effective and could endanger judicial independence.

Tallinn Circuit Court head finds positive aspects

Still, there are supporters of the plan. Kristjan Siigur, chief justice of the Tallinn Circuit Court, said he liked the idea because he saw potential opportunities in it.

"Opportunities specifically to better allocate and redistribute the resources given to the court system from the state budget according to needs — meaning to direct resources toward the resolution of cases where they are most needed at the moment," he explained.

According to Siigur, this would be easier to achieve within fewer, larger institutions. At the same time, he acknowledged that there is significant opposition to the idea and likely fewer supporters than critics.

"Nevertheless, it seems to me that these are not the kinds of ideas that should be immediately buried. We must not forget that the draft proposal is only the first step in the legislative process. It outlines some ideas for how to achieve certain goals. During this process, anyone who wishes can submit objections or alternative ideas," Siigur added.

He considered it possible that this process could eventually lead to a much better outcome than what is currently written in the draft.

Siigur believes the proposed merger plan would offer broader opportunities to use resources for the administration of justice more efficiently and that larger court institutions would make it easier to form departments or groups of judges and officials specialized in specific fields.

"One of the very serious problems facing the courts today is that disputes are becoming increasingly complex and time-consuming year by year," Siigur noted, adding that it is no longer feasible to expect judges to quickly and universally resolve cases across very different fields of law.

According to Siigur, there seems to be a general consensus that, under the current court structure, tasks and level of state funding, it is not possible to carry out the courts' work sustainably. Courts cannot choose which cases to resolve and he believes the current system cannot sustainably administer justice in the spirit of the Constitution.

In response to his colleagues' argument that the Ministry of Justice's plan is unconstitutional, Siigur remarked that "where there are two lawyers, there are three opinions," suggesting that he does not see a constitutional conflict. 

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!