Pacific Judicial Strengthening Initiative ‘Pathways ...€¦ · Web viewThis report identifies the capacity-building requirements to establish a Pacific Centre of Judicial Education

PJSI: Pathways Project

Pacific Judicial Strengthening Initiative ‘Pathways’ Project

PACIFIC CENTRE OF JUDICIAL EDUCATIONAssessment & Transition Strategy

Overview

This report identifies the capacity-building requirements to establish a Pacific Centre of Judicial Education (PCJE). Building on the preliminary assessment dated 1 September 2016, it assesses the organisational capacity of PNG’s Centre for Judicial Excellence (PNGCJE). It then provides a transition strategy and budget to build the capacity of PNGCJE from its existing role as a domestic provider into a role of regional provider of judicial education across the Pacific during the term of PJSI (2016-21).

There is a range of issues on which directions are required from regional stakeholders, which include:

a) Constituency - key court actors or more broad?b) Objectives - building competency through training or judicial

excellence?c) Governance - directions on board functioning, representationd) Enactment - through formal legislation or informally by MOU?e) Budget - feasible financial modelling: GoPNG, user-pay, donorsf) Accommodation - should this include a hostel?g) Organisation - endorsement of transitional organisational chart.

Additionally, it is recommended that 4 ‘red-lines’ must be crossed by PNG.CJE before the establishment of PCJE can be finalised.

Contents

1. Purpose 2

2. Background 2

3. Current status 4

4. Capacity-building strategy 6

5. Transitional issues 6

6. Issues requiring stakeholders’ direction 14

7. Scheduling, milestones and ‘red-lines’ 14

8. Capacity-building plan and transitional checklist 14

9. Annexes 18a. Budget 18b. PNGCJE & PCJE Organisational Chart 19

Livingston Armytage14 March 2017.

1PJSI is funded by the New Zealand Government and implemented by the Federal Court of Australia



Pacific Judicial Strengthening Initiative ‘Pathways’ Project

PACIFIC CENTRE OF JUDICIAL EDUCATIONAssessment & Transition Strategy

1. PURPOSE

At the meeting of Pacific Judicial Strengthening Initiative’s (PJSI) Chief Justices in Port Moresby on 7-9 September 2016, the regional judicial leadership provided in-principle endorsement to explore and address the needs of PNG’s Centre for Judicial Excellence (PNGCJE) to build its capacity as a Pacific Centre of Judicial Education (PCJE) on a sustainable basis.1

The purpose of this assessment is to identify the capacity-building requirements of PNGCJE to become a regional provider of judicial education and training across the Pacific, as a part of PJSI’s Institutionalising Judicial Development ‘Pathways’ strategy project.2

This report provides a scoped and costed transition strategy to build the capacity of PNGCJE as a judicial training institution, it identifies issues for stakeholders’ directions, and it outlines what specific actions are required to transition PNGCJE from its existing domestic role into a regional role as PJCE for the consideration of stakeholders.

2. BACKGROUND

This is the third report of this project: it supplements and extends the two earlier assessments made on the capacity of PNGCJE (dated 2 June 2016) and the needs of courts across the region (dated 1 September 2016) respectively.

The initial assessment dated 2 June commended the establishment of PNGCJE and its headway in delivering judicial education and training in PNG since 2010. Beyond these achievements, it noted that the major challenge ahead is to build on these foundations to consolidate its institutional capacity to address widespread unmet domestic judicial training needs, prior to addressing regional training needs in due course. More specifically, it identified a number of weaknesses that included: substantial unmet domestic judicial training needs; limited capacity to meet domestic needs; lack of any curriculum focus on developing judicial skills; institutional capacity incomplete (legislative mandate, dedicated budget, autonomous board); insufficient trained staff; and no suitably qualified director. It also identified two threats that assuming a regional role may erode delivery of domestic training, and regional stakeholders may prefer another training supplier. This assessment recommended PNGCJE should build and consolidate its institutional capacity at the earliest opportunity by taking the following steps:

1 Pending formal naming by regional stakeholders, ‘PCJE’ is an acronym used to nominate any regional provider of judicial development as the ‘Pacific Centre for Judicial Education (or Excellence)’.2 The term ‘continuing judicial education’ is used generically to include in-service education and training of judges,magistrates and court officers who may be lay-trained and/or lay.



1) formalise the legislative mandate of the Centre2) secure a recurrent dedicated budget, which integrates all training-related

resources of departmental training divisions of National Judicial Staff Service (NJSS) and Magisterial Services (MS).

3) invest decision-making authority in the Board4) re-classify the role of Director to the rank of a Judge of the National Court (or in

other jurisdictions, the High Court) Judge and/or University Professor5) recruit a permanent Director6) recruit adequate professional and administrative staff7) refocus curriculum thematically on developing judicial skills8) introduce publications and invest in IT-based delivery9) expand training premises, infrastructure and equipment10) renew the training program on a 3-year rolling plan to adopt a more thematic

skills focus, for example on building core judicial skills, which is annually revised with the courts.

On 28 June 2016, Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia accepted this assessment as being ‘fair’, and committed to taking a number of immediate steps to implement those recommendations, which are ongoing, for example, in seeking approval from PNG’s Judicial Council to recruit a permanent Executive Director and additional staff for PNGCJE.

The second preliminary assessment dated 1 September made three major findings: first, there are substantial unmet needs for in-service or continuing judicial education and training across the Pacific region. Second, with the exception of ad hoc and donor-supported initiatives such as PJSI and RRRT, no institutional training provider(s) exists and operates to address these training needs on a regional basis. Third, PNGCJE is a nascent provider of continuing judicial education with an existing mandate to support regional training. While its capacity is at this stage limited, it offers a potential - and probably the best available prospect - to address these needs in the medium term.

That assessment noted: ‘the modest levels of existing capacity, any such capacity-building support will depend on clear milestones of achievement being specified and attained by PNGCJE with ‘red-lines’ beyond which non-compliance would abort ongoing support’ (emphasis added). These modest levels of capacity of PNGCJE are measured in: staffing which is small, consisting of acting-Director, executive officer, driver and tea-lady; and productivity which is low and declining: 2011/2: 9 activities (including 3 ‘joint’ activities with PJDP, Commonwealth Secretariat, Commonwealth Magistrates and Judges Association); 2013: 0 activities; 2014: 7 activities; 2015: 2-3 activities; 2016: 2 activities, to date.

It also identified the institutional capacity requirements of any regional provider of judicial education. These requirements embody three key dimensions of functional capacity (what activities the institutional should be capable to do), human capacity (what level of personnel are required to perform those functions) and organisational capacity (how the institution is structured to operate effectively).

a Functional capacity - it identified the core functions of any regional provider to include:- Training of Trainers (ToT); Training needs assessment (TNA); development of regional curriculum courses resources and materials on generic core topics shared by all; development of services to include face to face (F2F) activities, ‘blended learning’ using web-based information communication technologies (ICT), and publications; research of local/regional needs; and evaluation of training.



b Organisational capacity - it identified the organisational capacity of any regional provider to include (a) human resources: their number, quality, skills, and experience, (b) physical and material resources: machines, land, buildings, (c) financial resources: money and credit, (d) information resources: pool of knowledge, databases, and (e) intellectual resources: such as training materials, and so on. In establishing the organisational capacity of any regional provider of judicial education, regard is also required on issues relating to governance and managerial structure, infrastructure and equipment, and systems and processes.

c Human capacity - it identified the personnel requirements of any regional provider at the outset as a the bare minimum to comprise six (x6) officers including:

i. Director - a senior judge or professor respected across the region with an interest in judicial education responsible for stakeholder relations, direction, oversight and quality, with not less than 15 years of relevant professional experience

ii Education Officer - an experienced mid-career judicial officer with an interest in education or a professional educator with a familiarity and understanding of law and justice with not less than ten (10) years of relevant professional experience.

iii. Publications officer - an experienced mid-career (legal) publisher with a minimum of seven (7) years of relevant professional experience.

iv ICT officer - an experienced mid-career ICT professional with a minimum of seven (7) years of relevant professional experience.

v Finance manager - an experienced mid-career finance manager and/or accountant with a minimum of ten (10) years relevant professional experience

vi Clerical officer/administrative assistants - x1-3 experienced clerical/administrative officer(s) responsible for records, travel and administration, with a minimum of three (3) years of relevant work experience.

In light of these assessments, the Chief Justices of PJSI and the Chief Justices of the Pacific Judicial Conference (PJC) endorsed the recommendation to explore and address the needs of PNGCJE to build its capacity as a regional provider of judicial education at their meetings in September at Port Moresby.

3. CURRENT STATUS

This Adviser visited Port Moresby for the week 31 October - 4 November 2016. The purpose of that visit was to further research and gather data on the capacity-building requirements of PNGCJE to become a regional provider of judicial education. During that visit, he consulted with key actors including: Sir Salamo Injia Chief Justice, Sir Gibbs Salika Deputy Chief Justice and Chair of PNGCJE, Regina Sagu Acting Director PNGCJE, and Jack Kariko Secretary of NJSS together and their respective officers. In addition, he addressed a meeting of the Board of PNGCJE on this project.

These consultations were timely in eliciting the current status of PNGCJE:-

Role - The board of PNG has endorsed the plan to become a regional provider and changed the name of PNGCJE into PCJE to reflect/forecast its expanding regional role.

Planning - The Chief Justice has formulated an ‘Establishment Roadmap’ dated 10 October. This roadmap starts to plan a variety of domestic actions required to ‘grow’ PNGCJE into PCJE.



Infrastructure - The National Courts of PNG are presently undergoing a major infrastructure program including building a new court complex costing PGK 627m (PGK 427m new complex and PGK 200m refurbishing existing complex). Construction is planned to start imminently and the building phase will require about 2.5 years. It is hoped that completion will be ready for the APEC meeting in September 2018, though the allocation of budget is yet to be confirmed. In the meantime, PGK 8m has been allocated to building 4 transitional temporary buildings during the construction phase. These buildings will be ready in late November, proving 3 additional courtrooms and offices for 200 staff. Ultimately, it is envisaged that PNGCJE will occupy these temporary buildings (which have specification for about 50 years) once the new complex is operational.

Budget - The Chief Justice has indicated by email dated 3 November 2016 that: ‘the judiciary will commit PGK 6m out of its recurrent appropriation to fund PNGCJE’s capacity-building program in 2017 to undertake regional duties. The budget allocation in 2015 is PGK 4.6m of which PGK 3m was spent while in 2016 the budget was PGK 6.6m of which PGK 1.8m was spent. In 2017, with increased activities, PNGCJE should be able to spend the PGK 6m. and achieve its objectives in capacity building.’3 The Chief Justice has also indicated that he envisages GoPNG funding PCJE during its establishment period (Y1-3) and thereafter contributions to be solicited from participating PICs and/or donors. On 20 February 2017, Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia indicated that funding for new staff roles and accommodation ‘had been quarantined’ within the courts’ budget.4

Staffing - Arrangements are being finalised to expand the organisational chart for PNGCJE and formalise position descriptions that specify staff requirements, grading and key responsibilities. The Adviser provided assistance with the organisation chart and position descriptions during this visit. Once approved by the Judicial Council, which is the body chaired by the Chief Justice of PNG responsible for judicial appointments, it is expected that recruitment (for phase one to expand PNGCJE) will commence in late November 2016 and that the new personnel will be appointed by Easter 2017, for the following positions:

o Executive Director (ED)o IT Manager (ITM)o Publications Manager (PM)o Finance Manager (FM)o Program Officers x3o IT Technical Officero Editorial Assistanto Finance Officero Office Administrator.

These appointments will enable PNGCJE to operate at an expanded capacity as a domestic provider of continuing judicial education in 2017. In phase 2 of recruitment, once endorsed by

3 Email of Chief Justice Injia dated 3 November 2016. The expenditure of PGK is global, that is, for both PNGCJE and regional activities.4 Email of Sir Salamo Injia dated 20 February 2017.



the regional stakeholders of PJSI, a number of these positions (ED, ITM, PM, FM and support staff) will also support the establishment of the regional centre in due course - as outlined in the annexed organisational chart: green representing PNGCJE, brown representing shared, and blue representing regional positions.

Timeframe - PNG will host APEC in September 2018; in the following month, the Chief Justice retires - these events may provide timely incentives and target dates for transitional planning.

On 2 December 2016, Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia endorsed this draft strategy document as follows: ‘Except for slight amendments to add 5 more staff on the PNG side, all other information and duty statements for staff are accurate and acceptable to us’.5

On 20 February 2017, Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia reported that the staff establishment, including Executive Director, had been approved by the Judicial Council; and that a submission had been made to the SRC (Salaries & Remuneration Commission chaired by the Speaker of Parliament) on 13 December 2016. The Chief Justice is awaiting the decision of the SRC.6

4. CAPACITY-BUILDING STRATEGY

The objective of this project is to build institutional capacity within the region to provide continuing judicial education on a sustainable basis to replace donor support once discontinued. As outlined above, a preliminary assessment has been undertaken to attain this objective, and Chief Justices have endorsed the recommendation to explore and address the needs of PNGCJE to build its operational capacity into a regional provider of judicial education. This strategy aims to build this capacity to transition into the role of regional provider of a range of services that build judicial competence across the region. This strategy will be regionally owned, sustainable and more cost-effective than establishing a new organisation and investing in new infrastructure.

5. TRANSITIONAL ISSUES

This report now assesses the transitional issues that will confront PNGCJE in growing into a regional role, and it identifies specific actions required to implement this transition by analysing the ‘gap’ between the existing capacity of PNGCJE and the requirements of any PCJE.

1 Mandate, constituency and objectives

The existing mandate of PNGCJE is as a domestic non-freestanding entity of NJSS that is constituted by Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between PNG’s NJSS, MS and Department of Justice & Attorney General (DJAG). There have been local discussions about formalising its mandate through enabling legislation. Chief Justice Injia reports that this informal arrangement has served its purpose well to date. It is not yet clear whether there are any regional requirements that may require the establishment of PCJE through legislation or require other procedures.

In relation to the constituency of any regional provider, it will be timely for stakeholders to debate whether the primary focus should - as it presently does - stay on court actors (judges, magistrates, court officers), or extend further to other justice sector actors such as prosecutors, bar, government

5 Email of Sir Salamo Injia dated 2 December 2016.6 Email of Sir Salamo Injia dated 20 February 2017.



lawyers and possibly prison officers. This assessment recommends retaining the existing narrower focus in order to avoid dissipation of resources, though this constituency could be extended to other actors where appropriate and relevant on an activity-by-activity basis. Should there be stakeholder demand for a wider approach, this could be addressed through a strategic planning process that sequences the expansion of support to other justice sector actors over time.

In order to build capacity for a regional role, the objectives of PCJE will require review. The existing objectives of PNGCJE focus on education and training. The objectives for PCJE should certainly include education and training, that is: to promote developing the competence of justice sector actors, principally judges, magistrates and court officers working in the courts across the Pacific.7 But stakeholders may envisage objectives that are broader to focus on promoting ‘excellence’ which is broader than competence and describes the quality of over all performance of the courts and their key actors. It is noted that the objectives of PJSI have evolved from focusing primarily on training to include access to justice, public information, delay reduction and annual reporting over the years.

Actions: Regional stakeholders to provide directions on enactment, mandate constituency and

objectives of PJCE prior to formal establishment.

2 Governance

The existing governance structure of PNGCJE is constituted by a board comprises representatives of PNG’s High Court, Magisterial Services, National Judicial Staff Service, Department of Justice & Attorney General, Legal Training Institute and University of PNG. In the past, MFAT has indicated that it does not require its service provider to provide any governance-related advice in relation to PJSI.

Informal preliminary inquiries with SPF have suggested that there is no prescriptive process to formalise identity as a regional organisation, and that any arrangement between PICs with PCJE could be solemnised by memorandum of understanding.

Actions: Regional stakeholders to provide directions on board functioning, representation and

decision-making responsibilities. Extend inquiries on the existence of any requirements for regional organisations

(underway via MFAT and SPF)

3 Organisation

At present, PNGCJE is managed by a board which is chaired by Deputy Chief Justice Sir Gibbs Salika and by Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia as ex-officio chair. To date, Principal Magistrate Regina Sagu has served as acting-Director. NJSS provides administrative support. In order to build capacity for any expanded role, it is recommended that a permanent appointment to the Director’s position be made. Moreover, for the regional role, it is recommended that a regionally-respected Director at rank of high court justice or professor be appointed, supported by adequate staff, as discussed below under ‘personnel’. It is proposed that the appointment process be staged: that is, the Director will initially be appointed in a ‘domestic’ role, and once the regional governance structure is established, it will consider expanding this to a regional role.

7 ‘Competence’ is defined as being the ability to perform specified functions to a designated standard of proficiency.



Actions: Regional stakeholders to authorise appointment of a permanent director at level of

justice or professor, supported by adequate staffing, as per organisational chart attached.

4 Budget

Commercial-in-confidence.

5 Capital & Infrastructure

At present, PNGCJE is accommodated in the premises of the High Court of PNG. The High Court is undergoing a major building/refurbishment program. The construction of 4 temporary buildings is nearing completion to accommodate 3 courts and two hundred staff during the 2.5 year construction of a new court complex and refurbishment of the existing building valued at PGK 627m (AUD 260m). Construction was originally expected to start mid-2016 with completion scheduled to coincide with PNG hosting APEC in September 2018. Construction is however awaiting allocation of the mobilisation tranche (30% of PGK 400m), only a fraction of which has yet been disbursed. At the present time, there is a range of contingencies affecting the availability and release of this funding to enable construction to start. These contingencies will flow on to also affect the availability of accommodation for PCJE during the transitional construction period, and will require ongoing monitoring. On completion, the Chief Justice has offered to relocate CJEPNG/PJCE to the new temporary buildings. At present these plans make no provision for any hostel accommodation. The existing premises occupied by PNGCJE are not sufficient and fit for regional purposes, and additional interim arrangements will be needed to accommodate any regional provider pending completion of the new complex. On 20 February 2017, Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia indicated that funding accommodation ‘had been quarantined’ within the courts’ budget.9

Actions: CJ.PNG to confirm availability of suitable interim and permanent accommodation

including offices, lecturing, seminar, ICT and publishing facilities at the National Court of PNG (PNGNC).10

Regional stakeholders to specify whether hostel accommodation is required GoPNG allocation of mobilisation funding for new complex to be monitored.

6 Personnel

PNGCJE is presently under-staffed with an acting-Director, Executive Officer and driver. PNGCJE reports having a trained/experienced domestic faculty; and it plans to extend ToT for existing and

9 Email of Sir Salamo Injia dated 20 February 2017.10 On 20 February, the Chief Justice indicated: “Facilities: 2 temporary demountable buildings have been dismantled and inplace for re-assembling for the facility. A concept design and scoping work is underway. The project might be tendered, which will take time. I am unable to give an estimate when construction will commence.” Email of Sir Salamo Injia dated 20 February 2017.



new faculty. An organisational chart for the recruitment of additional staff has been prepared in 2 phases to: (i) expand PNGCJE and (ii) establish PCJE. The Chief Justice has approved this chart and will obtain endorsement of the Judicial Council in November to recruit additional positions.

Of crucial importance is the recruitment of a permanent head for PNGCJE/PCJE. As outlined in the organisational chart, this is the new position of Executive Director, which is above the existing position of (acting)-Director of PNGCJE. This is a very senior position graded at the level of a justice of the high court or a professor, which in the PNG system is at the level of Appointed Leader 8 (AL8), or above. The key requirements of this role are to be a regionally respected and seasoned jurist or educator with the vision, passion and dynamism to establish PCJE. Because this is a regional role, recruitment should be extended across the region. To secure the best candidate, it may be necessary to grade this position more highly than AL8 in the PNG system at the contractual level of ‘Adviser’.This would offer a substantially higher and very competitive package for the international market. The Chief Justice of PNG has informally indicated that it would be feasible for GoPNG (NJSS) to fund this Advisor-level role during the establishment period. Such positioning may well be required and warranted during the establishment phase (Y1-3) to ensure the sound positioning of PCJE in the region, though it would be unlikely to be sustainable at this level indefinitely.

This organisational chart is annexed for the consideration and endorsement of stakeholders. As outlined above, on 20 February 2017, Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia reported that the staff establishment, including Executive Director, had been approved by the Judicial Council; and that a submission had been made to the SRC (Salaries & Remuneration Commission chaired by the Speaker of Parliament) on 13 December 2016. The Chief Justice is awaiting the decision of the SRC.11

Actions:CJ.PNG to recruit the Executive Director and additional positions for PNGCJE prior to 30 June 2017. PNGCJE to apply for ToT support from PJSI if/as needed. Regional stakeholders to endorse organisational chart for PJCE.

7 Operations, systems and procedures

The earlier assessments have noted the ‘modest’ level of existing capacity of PNGCJE, measured in terms of its understaffing and low levels of productivity. To build the capacity of PNGCJE for any regional role, there is a need to build its systems and procedures so that it can operate efficiently to discharge its existing mandate of conducting a domestic program of continuing judicial education and training for court actors in PNG before expanding its role as a regional training provider. Observations of the operation of PNGCJE disclose the existence of some systems and procedures in, for example, the administration of board meetings and the preparation of seminars and materials. But despite the best efforts of existing personnel, the operational capacity of PNGCJE is very limited. Recruitment of additional staff will offer some potential to expand operational capacity in due course. But it is also foundationally important to build the capacity of PNGCJE through providing managerial expertise to strengthen the internal systems and processes of all aspects of operations.

Actions:h) PNGCJE to apply for a PJSI ‘Leadership Incentive Fund’ grant to provide managerial

expertise to support develop PNGCJE’s systems and procedures.

11 Email of Sir Salamo Injia dated 20 February 2017.



8 Curriculum, training program, publications and ICT

At the local level, PNGCJE administers a 5-year ‘business plan’ that specifies the training activities to be undertaken for the courts in PNG. Earlier assessments have noted that many of these activities have in practice been postponed or not done; and they have recommended a 3-year ‘rolling annual plan’ will be more manageable and responsive to changing needs. At the regional level, PJSI has undertaken an assessment of the needs of PICs for continuing judicial education in late 2015. This constitutes the best available assessment of training needs, though this may require some supplementation to further differentiate the respective needs of law-trained and lay officers as fully as may be required in due course, depending on the mandate and constituency of any regional provider.

Once stakeholders have endorsed the establishment of PCJE, together with any appropriate transitional arrangements, it will be timely to develop a regional program of services. Depending on the mandate of the regional provider, this program should initially build on the foundations of PJSI’s existing services, which support the development of courts’ performance broadly. To the extent these services relate to continuing judicial education, this program should be developed in the form of a curriculum of trainings to be offered; to the extent that it is broader, this program will comprise a range of other technical supports that will be articulated in response to identified needs in due course.

Curriculum development and sharing

In the Preliminary Assessment dated 1 September 2016, the term curriculum was defined to describe the subjects that comprise a course or program of studies in a training institution. It usually specifies the subjects, describes the modules and includes the schedule or timetable. The term is mostly used in the macro-sense for an entire programmatic or in the micro-sense for an individual teaching session. The purpose of a curriculum is to plan what is to be taught, to whom, and how. This requires a range of decisions to be made about subject matter, relationship between knowledge skills and attitudes, their organisation and sequence.

The ‘Business Plan’ of PNGCJE is the instrument that comes nearest to an existing curriculum. This plan was devised at the start to steer the training program for the first 5 years of operation. The earlier assessment describes this plan as being unrealistically ambitious; in practice, activities have either been postponed indefinitely or not performed. PNGCJE is now in the process of revising its ongoing program more along the recommended lines of a three-year annual rolling plan that will be more realistic and enable greater responsiveness to change.

As a part of any ongoing process to revise and upgrade the curriculum planning process, it is recommended that PNGCJE continue to both design/conduct its own activities as well as share adapt and use existing courseware of other providers. During its inception phase, PNGCJE has conducted some activities of its own and some in conjunction with other providers. Other providers who have already shared courses with PNGCJE include PJDP, Australian Mediation Association, Commonwealth Secretariat and the Commonwealth Judges & Magistrates Association (CMJA). In addition, PNGCJE has formal relationships with the Federal Court of Australia, the Commonwealth Judicial Education Institute (CJEI), and the National Judicial College of Australia (NJCA). A number of other providers have a demonstrable interest the region, notably New Zealand’s Institute of Judicial Studies (IJS), and the Judicial Commission of New South Wales, who can be approached to share courseware and collaborate in the delivery of training activities.



Training program

In relation to program operations, it is recommended that PNGCJE continues to operate its existing domestic program of activities, and that PCJE establishes a separate program for PICs in due course, rather than to merge the domestic program into a regional program from the outset. Doubtless aspects of both programs may converge and be shared; but equally doubtless there will be distinctive needs of each that should be retained separately. It follows that separate operations should, at least initially, be maintained to enable each program to operate. It is to reflect this functionality that the organisational chart has been segmented into ‘PNGCJE’, ‘shared’ and ‘PIC’ components.

At present, PNGCJE conducts some seminars, but it does not publish any training publications nor does it offer any ICT-based training services. These are substantial deficiencies or ‘gaps’ for any provider of continuing judicial education notably where distance separates users from the service provider, as is the case both in PNG and more markedly across the region. Hence, from the outset, the capacity-building strategy for PCJE will be affected significantly by the nature of the services to be provided and, more specifically, the extent to which these services utilise publication and information communication technologies (ICT). Publications offer the advantages of quality-assured support with usually long shelf life that is generally cost effective for providers and convenient to users across the region. ICT provides the means to publish electronically and will enable any regional provider to supply a range of services in a potentially radical new way; that is, remotely or some ‘blended’ or hybrid manner, rather than entirely face-to-face (F2F) as has previously been the tradition.12 PJSI may partner with USP in the companion “Gateway” Project which will be piloting a range of blended and remote delivery modalities that may be adaptable for the purposes of continuing judicial education across the region

This extended range of program beyond F2F services is fundamentally important from the outset because of the geographic and demographic features of the Pacific region, which PICs are characterised by their smallness and dispersion. ICT will restructure not only service delivery relationships but also budgetary allocations that have traditionally required approximately 50% for the logistics of travel and accommodation. While the costs of developing remote servicing including interactive websites and hybrid or ‘blended’ courseware should not be under-estimated, they also provide substantial additional advantages through improved access and convenience to users. For these reasons, the issue of investing structurally in developing ICT capacity of any regional entity requires close consideration from the outset.

The development of ICT strategies should build on existing ICT infrastructure wherever possible rather than establish parallel systems. It is appreciated that USP has invested substantially in regional ICT infrastructure for the delivery of courses across the region, which will be directly relevant in these considerations. It is also appreciated that MFAT is presently scoping support for regional ICT, which will inform these considerations in due course.

It is recommended that publications and ICT strategies be scoped and developed from the start of regional operations; and to enable these capabilities, considerations should also be given from the outset to the recruitment of both a Publications Manager and an ICT Manager as proposed in the organisation chart.

12 ‘F2F’ describes all face-to-face services including conferences, seminars or workshops that participants attend in-person; hybrid or ‘blended’ activities describe services that mix F2F with ICT or web-based delivery strategies in some way.



Actions:i) PJCE recruit Publications and ICT Managers, and develop program strategies for

F2F, publications and ICT from the start of its operations.j) Initiate dialogue with other providers of judicial training interested in sharing

courseware and collaborating in the delivery of trainingk) PNGCJE develop an updated training plan for 2017, and successfully conduct a

number of courses (of between 10-20 annually) as a demonstration of its ability to fulfill its domestic mandate and its capacity to perform as a judicial training provider at a satisfactory level of proficiency.

6. ISSUES REQUIRING STAKEHOLDERS’ DIRECTION

Noting the above, there is a range of issues on which directions are required from regional stakeholders, which include:-

l) Constituency - key court actors or more broad?m) Objectives - building competency through training or judicial excellence?n) Governance - directions on board functioning, representationo) Enactment - through formal legislation or informally by MOU?p) Budget - feasible financial modelling: GoPNG, user-pay, donorsq) Accommodation - should this include a hostel?r) Organisation - endorsement of transitional organisational chart.

7. SCHEDULING, MILESTONES AND ‘RED-LINES’In relation to scheduling, discussions with the Chief Justice of PNG indicate that the preferred scheduling of any transition and start of PCJE should be coordinated with the APEC meeting to be held in Port Moresby in September 2018, which coincides with the completion of his term of office and provides a number of incentives for completion within that timeframe. Working within this timeframe, the annexed budget rests on a number of assumptions outlined above.

The preliminary assessment of 1 September 2016 specified that PJSI provide capacity-building support is dependent on clear milestones of achievement being specified and attained by PNGCJE with ‘red- lines’ beyond which non-compliance would abort ongoing support. The above analysis identifies a number of milestones that will be critical to PNGCJE taking on any expanded role as regional provider, and are thereby pre-conditional for the ongoing support of PJSI.

In order to assure readiness to start PCJE by September 2018, these milestones or ‘red-lines’ would comprise the following prior to the next meeting of PJSI’s judicial leadership in Apia on 3-7 April 2017:

1) appointment of permanent Director and full staff for PNGCJE as detailed in green and orange in the attached organisation chart

2) confirmation of interim accommodation arrangements for PCJE at PNGHC3) confirmation of GoPNG’s funding of Y1-3.4) PNGCJE develop an updated training plan for 2017, and successfully conduct a

number of courses (of between 10-20 annually) as a demonstration of its ability to fulfill its domestic mandate and its capacity to perform as a judicial training provider at a satisfactory level of proficiency.

8. CAPACITY-BUILDING PLAN AND TRANSITIONAL CHECKLIST

This assessment now provides the capacity-building plan for PNGCJE that builds on this analysis in the form of the checklist of transitional actions outlined below:-

CHECKLIST (overleaf)



Issues Needs Status Actions Timeframe

1 Mandate, constituency, objectives

Constitution

Formalisation by legislation?

PNGCJE isdomestic non- freestanding entity of NJSS constituted ‘informally’ by MOU between PNG’s NJSS, MS, DJAG.

Regional stakeholders to provide directions on legislation, mandate, constituency, objectives.

CJLF#2:April 2017, Samoa

2 Governance Board structure

Responsibilities

Representation

Functioning

PNGCJE board structure comprises representatives of PNG’s HC, MS, NJSS, DJAG, LTI & UPNG.

Regional stakeholders to provide directions on board functioning, representation, and ‘regional’ status.


3 Organisation Management PNGCJE ismanaged by a board chaired by DCJ and ex- officio the CJ. To date, Regina Sagu has served as acting- Director. NJSS provides administrative support.

CJ.PNG torecruit the Executive Director and additional positions for PNGCJE prior to 30 June2017.


4 Budget Capital

Recurrent

Sustainability

Allocated funding under- expended; provided from budget of NJSS at discretion of CJ.CJ.PNG has informally offered to accommodate PCJE at HC, and to fund establishment phase of PCJE

GoPNG to confirm availability of funding for Y1- 3.

CJ.PNG toconfirm availability of accommodatio n at HC.PNG.

Regional stakeholders to indicate capacity for

CJLF-IEC#2-April 2017, Samoa

CJLF-IEC#3:Sept 2017,Remote

CJLF-IEC#3:Sept 2017, Remote



(Y1-3). user-pay, and lobby executive branches to secure funding for judicial education

Budget for Y4+ to be developed in due course

MFAT to indicate appetite to fund PCJE.

5 Capital, infrastructure

Office

Training rooms

Hostel

Equipment

CJ.PNG offered to host PCJE at HC;

Existing PNGCJE premises unfit for regional purposes.

CJ.PNG toconfirm availability of suitable interim and permanent accom. at PNG.HC

CJLF-IEC#2:April 2017, Samoa

GoPNGallocation of mobilisation funding for new complex to be monitored.



6 Personnel Director, staff and faculty.

PNGCJE isunder-staffed; existing domestic faculty is trained; CJ.PNG has approved transitional organisational chart, subject to Judicial Council.

PNGCJE toapply for ToT from PJSI if/as needed.

Stakeholders to endorse organisational chart for PCJE.

Recruitment in 2 phases:1. PNGCJE > 6/17:2. PCJE > after CJLF#2: 3/17+.

CJLF-IEC#4:April 2018,

Auck

CJLF-IEC#2:April 2017, Samoa


7 Operations, systems, procedures

Systems & Procedures

‘Modest’ existing capacity to be developed

PNGCJE toapply for LIF grant for support to develop systems and procedures.


8 Training program, publications, ICT

Courses (F2F)

Publications

ICT

PNGCJEoperates a 5- year domestic business plan; PJSI has assessed regional needs

PJCE to recruit Publications and ICT Managers, and develop program strategies from the start of operation;

PJCE to initiate dialogue with other providers

PNGCJE update training plan for 2017, and successfully conduct a number of courses (of between 10-20 annually).


*****



9. ANNEXES

a. Budget

Fully costed discussion-draft budget attached separately.


b. PNGCJE & PCJE Organisational Chart

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR(AL 8)?

Director PNGCJE Program

NJS 13-14? ITManager

NJS 11-12?

Publications Manager

NJS 11-12?

Finance Manager

NJS 11-12?

Director PCJE Program

NJS 13-14? (AL3)?

Program Officers– NJSS

Ju d

Program Officer – LJSA

a)NJS 10- 12?

Editorial Assist.

NJS 5-6

Program Officer Judicial Officers (Law Trained)

NJS 10-12Plus Allowance

Program Officer Lay judicial

OfficerNJS 10-12

Plus Allowance

Program Officer

Court Officers NJS 10-12

PlusAllowance

Administration/ logistics Officer

NJS 4-5

Driver/Clerk

NJS1-2

Driver/Clerk

NJSS 1-2

Administration/ logistics Officer

NJS 4-5


Finance Officer

NJS 5-6

ITTechni

cal Officer

NJS 6-8

Office Administrator

NJS 5-6

Program Officers – MS

Ju

KeyPngCJE Staff (responsible for PNG trainings)

Intermediate Staff(assist both PngCJE &

PicCJE) PicCJE Staff(responsible for PicCJE

trainings)

Executive Officer

NJS 8-10?

Documents

Pacific Judicial Strengthening Initiative ‘Pathways ...€¦ · Web viewThis report identifies the capacity-building requirements to establish a Pacific Centre of Judicial Education