Improving Trust Through Judicial Transparency : Building Public Confidence Through Open Government Initiatives

This submission is part of a column swap with the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) bimonthly member magazine, AALL Spectrum. Published six times a year, AALL Spectrum is designed to further professional development and education within the legal information industry. Slaw and the AALL Spectrum board have agreed to hand-select several columns each year as part of this exchange. 

The Rule of Law is a system of laws, institutions, norms, and commitments that further four key principles: accountability, just law, open government, and accessible and impartial justice. Rule of Law initiatives have been promoted by the American Bar Association throughout the world, and Rule of Law goals are included in the application process for countries seeking to join the European Union. Both authors of this article—Judge Betim Jahja of the North Macedonia Court of Appeals and Karen Westwood, director of the Hennepin County Law Library—are particularly interested in the open government principle of the Rule of Law as a means of increasing trust in the judicial system.

Judicial Context in North Macedonia

In North Macedonia, there is a pervasive public distrust in the judiciary, with a common perception that judges are overly political, make decisions based on ethnic and political favoritism, and are susceptible to bribery. Adding to this distrust is public pressure—particularly in high profile cases—to secure swift convictions. North Macedonia follows a civil law system, and while selected cases are published on the court’s website, search functionality is limited and cases are anonymized prior to publication, adding another step to the publication process. In a system with constrained technology and funding, there is limited appetite for significant investment in court technology to address these challenges.

As a result, the courts face difficult decisions about how to make judicial processes more open and understandable without overhauling existing systems or making major technological investments—in short, how to achieve greater transparency while making efficient use of limited resources. To that end, the judiciary has embarked on two initiatives to make meaningful progress.

A National Strategy for Judicial Communication

On June 10, 2024, North Macedonia’s Judicial Council adopted a five-year Communication Strategy for the Judicial Council and the courts (2024–2028), with the goal of establishing a single, consistent communication policy across the entire judiciary. The Strategy frames transparency as more than the publication of well-reasoned decisions; it calls for systematic, proactive, two-way communication that provides timely and understandable information about how judicial decisions are made. Its broader objective is to rebuild public trust and reinforce the rule of law. The Strategy aligns with national reform policies— including the justice sector development strategy and the “open government/open judiciary” agenda—and incorporates European guidance, including standards from the Council of Europe and the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice.

Based on a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) assessment that highlights critically low trust, resource constraints, and uneven communication capacity—especially the limited number of trained spokespersons—the Strategy prioritizes professionalization through clearer roles for court presidents and spokespersons, improved media protocols (including for high-profile cases), stronger internal communication, expanded digital outreach (including upgrades to the unified court portal), and continuous communication training. Implementation is supported by an Action Plan with measures, deadlines, and indicators, as well as the creation of an implementation commission and a network of court spokespersons to coordinate and monitor progress.

The Judicial–Media Council: Institutionalizing Dialogue

Perhaps the most innovative development in recent years is the establishment of the Judicial–Media Council, formally launched on September 21, 2018 in Skopje as a distinct body within the Association of Judges of the Republic of North Macedonia. The Council brings together judges and journalists in a permanent advisory forum designed to institutionalize dialogue between the judiciary and the media. Its mission is to strengthen judicial transparency, reduce the risk of misinterpretation of judicial proceedings, and promote responsible and accurate reporting on court activities.

The Council draws direct inspiration from the Massachusetts Judiciary–Media Committee model in the United States, adapting this practical American approach to the domestic context and to European principles of judicial openness and transparency, as reflected in the opinions of the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE). Operating as a voluntary, nongovernmental platform within the Association of Judges, the Judicial–Media Council includes representatives from the courts, media associations, and civil society. It serves four primary purposes: (1) facilitating cooperation between judges and journalists through regular meetings and workshops; (2) drafting ethical guidelines for media coverage of judicial processes; (3) providing legal and communication training to enhance mutual understanding between the two professions; and (4) publishing educational materials and handbooks to promote transparency and public access to judicial information.
________________________________________

NORTH MACEDONIA IN CONTEXT

The Republic of North Macedonia is a landlocked country of the south-central Balkans, bordered by Kosovo, Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece, and Albania. It declared independence from the former Yugoslavia on December 8, 1991, and gained membership in NATO in 2020. The country received a large number of Albanians displaced from Kosovo during the Kosovo War of 1998–1999, and in 2001 a series of military clashes between ethnic Albanians and the Macedonian majority erupted. The Ohrid Framework Agreement put an official end to the armed conflict later in 2001 and included key points around nondiscrimination, equitable representation, education, and use of languages.

North Macedonia has been a candidate for European Union (EU) membership since 2005 and is committed to judicial reform, intelligence and security services reform, public administration reform, and democratic principles more broadly as pathways toward membership. Tensions between ethnic Albanians and Macedonians persist, and continue to influence public perceptions of government, elections, and the judiciary. The country’s progress has also been affected by increased refugee traffic beginning in 2015, as migrants moved from Greece through North Macedonia toward the EU borders with Hungary and Croatia, as well as by the significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. North Macedonia has a rich and storied history in the Balkans and is known for its natural beauty, fine food and wines, and legendary hospitality.

________________________________________

Guidance on Transparency in Practice

One of the Council’s most significant outputs is the Guidebook on Judicial Transparency for Judges and Journalists (2020), produced with the support of the European Union and USAID. The Guidebook offers practical recommendations on balancing freedom of expression with judicial confidentiality, draws on case law from the European Court of Human Rights, and clarifies how judges may communicate with the public without compromising impartiality or the presumption of innocence.

Importantly, the Guidebook emphasizes that transparency does not end with the publication of judicial decisions. Rather, it requires the continuous explanation of judicial actions in clear and accessible language, enabling the public to understand not only judicial outcomes but also the reasoning and values underlying judicial decision-making. This approach reflects the emergence of a new communication culture within the judiciary—one that promotes openness and public engagement while safeguarding judicial independence, dignity, and procedural fairness.

Expanding Public Access to Judicial Decisions

Additionally, in December 2022, the Supreme Court of the Republic of North Macedonia, sitting in General Session, adopted a Principled Legal Opinion requiring courts to publish non-final judicial decisions (judgments and rulings) in cases of public interest on their official websites. While existing legislation already obliges courts to publish final decisions within prescribed deadlines, the Supreme Court clarified that, in light of constitutional guarantees of publicity and freedom of information, as well as the lex specialis nature of the Criminal Procedure Code, transparency requires broader publication.

The Court grounded its position in constitutional principles of public hearings and public information, domestic procedural laws, and the European Convention on Human Rights, particularly Articles 6 and 10. Relying on the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the Supreme Court emphasized that public access to court decisions enhances the visibility of justice and that withholding information of high public interest may constitute a violation of freedom of expression. Accordingly, the Court concluded that publishing non-final decisions in matters of public interest is necessary to ensure transparency, accountability, and informed public debate about the functioning of the judiciary.

Implications for Law Librarians and Legal Information Professionals

An American legal information professional looking at these projects and this Principled Legal Opinion would immediately begin to see ways that law librarians could assist the courts in these projects, help members of the public access the information generated by the projects, and support citizens in locating underlying information directly from the courts. However, it appears that there is no formal law library profession in the country, and that academic and public libraries do not receive the level of funding or training available in the United States (for instance, there is no graduate information sciences degree available in the country). Nonetheless, examining these North Macedonian initiatives serves as a helpful reminder to U.S. legal information professionals of the importance of promoting attorney, media, and public access to court information, and of persisting in efforts to demand full and transparent access to the workings of the court.

Important Takeaways

• Courts and law librarians share a common commitment to transparency.
• Law librarians should approach courts directly to learn more about existing transparency
• Courts should enlist law librarians, when possible, to assist in promoting court information and transparency.
• Law librarians should participate with courts in shaping data practices, including rules governing public and private data, to promote judicial transparency while protecting privacy.
• Both generators of information (the courts) and users of information (law librarians and other stakeholders) can advance shared goals related to transparency.

This article serves as a reminder of the importance of communicating with justice partners and of taking a fresh look at existing relationships to create new opportunities for collaboration.

______

KAREN WESTWOOD
DIRECTOR
Hennepin County Law Library
Minneapolis, Minnesota

BETIM JAHJA
JUDGE
Appellate Court Skopje
Republic of North Macedonia