Challenges of case management in somaliland high court by Guled Abdulahi Osman law-18-511 & Salah Bile Warsame law-18-5

1. 
   The reference to efficiency in a judicial system is really necessary, because efficiency could be seen as a facet of the wider claim to the effectiveness of judicial protection of rights. It does not reduce the discussion to conform to market ideology where the the judicial protection of rights depends only of a profit-maximising and cost-minimising approach.
   
2. 
   The principle of case management is that the court, rather than the litigants, controls the pace of litigation. It is a modern approach to dispute resolution which seeks to move away from the bitter adversarial clashes of the past and encourage a greater degree of cooperation and partnership among all concerned.
   
3. 
   Judicial attention has come to be a scarce resource: (i) the rate of cases per judgeship has grown precipitously in lower, appeal and supreme courts; (ii) there are reasons to discuss various proposals that scholars and judges have offered in response to the rising caseload, including ways to reduce the number of filings, increase the number of judges, and improve efficiency in the courts with an appropiated case and court managment principles; (iii) there are frameworks to be taken into account regarding access to the courts and the effective protection of rights; (iv) the demand for judicial attention will continue to exceed the supply of judicial time, thereby rendering judicial attention a scarce resource.
   
4. 
   Critical components within an efficient judicial system are the court and case management. These depend on the court structure and arrangements within and between the courts both from a horizontal and from a vertical point of view. The structural design of a judicial system depends on multiple factors, one major is the legal cultural context. Judicial reform should have as its objective the improvement of the quality of justice and the efficiency and effectiveness of the judiciary, while strengthening and protecting the independence of the judiciary. Case management is a judicial process which provides effective, efficient and purposeful treatment to a case so as to achieve a timely and qualitative resolution of a dispute.
   
5. 
   The horizontal arrangement has two important components: (i) on one side the specialization of the courts, (ii) on the other side the distribution in the court with flexibility to adapt to the importance and / or the complexity of the case (single judge, panel of judges, etc.). The first point could be described distinguishing between ordinary and specialized courts, whether or not specialized courts are formally differentiated. That is, the court is unlikely to assert excessive control when its workload is excessive and tends to increase. That is why judicial management of the process has an aspect of desjudicialization too. Distribution and redistribution of tasks depend on the court organization and composition. The basic idea of redistributing tasks of courts (panel and individual judges) and support staff is to allow judges to concentrate on the core of their adjudication tasks. Additional to horizontal arrengements should be taken with reference to the vertical one. They are related with the interplay between superior and low courts. The role and ends of appeal as the supreme courts, the filter to access, the caseload and scope of review, the organization taking account that the number of judges in superior courts is not the same as the lower. The case and court management should be different. The crisis in the administration of justice must be attacked and treated by several fronts, because the problem has several causes that are fed back to time.
   
6. 
   Case management view should take into account alternative routes to resolution including ADR under the conditions presented above of respect to free option of parties and public policy.
   
7. 
   The appellate stage in general has first to identify what variables should be maximized, and second, confront the reality with the potential variables defy easy measurement. How could the courts reasonably maximize error correction and law development together? If error correction and law development could easily be measured and quantified, one could create a function that sought to maximize a combination of the two.
   
8. 
   Among the topics listed at the end of last paragraph, the heavy workload of the Supreme Courts has been a serious problem for a number of decades. Recognizing a right to review has increased the case load in the Supreme Courts. One side emphasize that the Supreme Court should decide every case to protect litigants interests, the other side says the case should be relevant only if it contributes to legal system values such as accountabilty, uniformity, general directions for future cases becasuse the decision is the "last word". Maybe these are no really "dilemmas" but complementary ends. Finally and as general contribution of this work. The aims of reform within justice systems and the judiciary must be predicated on sound principles that will improve the quality of justice for the citizens and should include complex goals: Improve the Quality of Access to Justice; Increase public confidence in the judicial system; Improve the image of the Judiciary; Provide an efficient system that does not compromise the quality of justice and access to justice.
   

Chapter 3