CEELI Assisting the Judiciary to Use Its Voice

As pressures on courts grow across Central and Eastern Europe, judges are recognizing that speaking out is no longer optional — it is becoming a necessity

Since 2016, there has been a significant trend in the cases brought before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The Court is seeing a growing number of cases filed by judges who feel their independence has been undermined and are seeking legal redress. Attacks on judges appear to form a consistent trend throughout the region, rather than being occasional or random incidents. Cases are coming from all over the region.

“Such a phenomenon had not arisen in the Court’s nearly seventy-year history,” mentions Canòlic Mingorance Cairat, Judge of the European Court of Human Rights.

These applications, and the clear shift they represent, draw attention to the threats facing our democracies and the rule of law crisis identified by the ECtHR, which the region is now experiencing.  One key question is how judges should speak publicly about the importance of judicial independence and, more broadly, preserving the rule of law.

"In each case, judges were not speaking as individuals pursuing personal interests. They were speaking as citizens with a constitutional responsibility — about the institution they serve, and the conditions under which it can function.” Highlights Cristi Danilet, a former Romanian judge, who recently obtained a European Court of Human Rights decision that confirmed his freedom of expression was violated.

Prague, February 2025: The CEE Judicial Network Responds

Against this backdrop, the CEELI Institute held a conference in Prague with the CEELI CEE Judicial Exchange Network — a cross-border network of judges and court professionals from across the region — on the theme of “Judicial Communication with the Public and the Media.”

The discussions centred on important areas of judicial communication, such as managing communication during crises, ensuring responsible court reporting, interacting with both traditional and digital media, and developing strategies to address misinformation and disinformation.

The conference brought together over 60 participants from 20 countries for two days of focused, practical dialogue. H.E. Urs Bucher, Ambassador of Switzerland to the Czech Republic, opened the event and underlined the importance of empowering judicial networks during this critical period.

CEELI Executive Director Robert Strang set the tone in his opening remarks

“The best learning comes from sharing experiences of professionals across jurisdictions.”

From Smear Campaigns to Doxing: What Pressure Looks Like on the Ground

The first panels reviewed recent challenges to the rule of law and judicial independence, highlighting the importance of judicial communication. Speakers from around the region described what pressure looks like on the ground.

From Romania, Andrea Chiș, former judge and former member of the Superior Council of Magistracy, presented her recent publication on the Council’s challenges and discussed the documentary Captured Justice (2025). The film examines the Romanian justice system, including the impact of statutory limitation rules in criminal cases and how concentrating decision-making in a small number of institutions can shape outcomes across the system.

From Albania, Asim Vokshi, Judge of the Albanian Constitutional Court, described how a smear campaign was used to target him personally.

Other judges spoke about doxing (malicious act of publicly revealing private, personally identifiable information) and coordinated attacks that can turn judges into public targets overnight, threatening even their physical safety.

The collective opinion among the gathered was straightforward: speaking through their written judgments alone is not sufficient; judges need to use their own voices to communicate to the public about the importance of the rule of law, especially when it is under attack.

The Question Has Changed: Not “If”, but “How”

Guidelines on Judicial Communication with the Public and Media (2025)

The topic thus shifted from the commonly asked question before “if judges should speak” to a question of “How should they speak?”. The most comprehensive answer to that is presented in our newest “Guidelines on Judicial Communication with Public and Media”, prepared by expert Ioanna Lachana, Media Officer, ECtHR, and the judges of the CEE Judicial Network.

The publication should serve as a practical tool for courts and judges on judicial communication. It highlights key topics including strategic judicial communication, engagement with media and the public, crisis communication, responsible use of social media, and responses to disinformation—aimed at strengthening public trust and safeguarding judicial independence.

It is also critical for judges to be able to explain their own decisions, in clear and plain language so that the general public can understand court rulings even if they do not necessarily agree with the results.  Justice must not only be done, but it must be seen to be done.  This approach is both realistic and readily implementable.

During the conference, many practical examples were shared by judges themselves on how to improve judicial communication. One particularly compelling suggestion was to begin a judgment with a short introductory paragraph that simply explains what happened in the case, why the court was asked to decide it, what the court decided, and what the decision means going forward.  Such a summary can be easily understood by the wider public and even directly used by the media, reducing the need for additional interpretation by court spokespersons.

The second day of the conference delved deeper into these implementable solutions, approaches, and practices from different jurisdictions and the guidebook. All in all, leaving the participants with inspiration for their own courts.

"When I entered the judiciary 25 years ago, I was taught something very simple: A good judge does not speak. Today, at the end of my judicial career, I find myself educating others about the rule of law on social media. So, something has changed — not only in the law, but in the culture of judging." Summarises Cristi Danilet, pointing at the real shift.

Freedom of expression is not just an individual right; it is also, and perhaps most importantly, an institutional responsibility. The conference succeeded in providing judges with tools to help them develop a voice they can use safely, strategically, and clearly.

Download the Guidelines on Judicial Communication with the Public and Media here