CEELI Institute Convenes Judges from Four Continents to Address Judicial Independence, Administration of Justice, AI in Courts, and Public Trust

Judiciary systems across the world are facing several challenges, both new and recurring, that include diminished judicial independence, difficulty upholding the rule of law, and decreasing public trust.

Judges, experts, and spokespersons from four continents gathered at the CEELI Institute on May 11-12, 2026, for the Central and Eastern European Judicial Exchange Network Conference: “Improving the Administration of Justice and Judicial Communication: Judicial Independence, Rule of Law and Public Trust.” The conference was an opportunity for judges from different regions and legal cultures to come together to discuss the current threats to their national judicial systems and share tools to protect and strengthen judicial independence.

In his keynote remarks, Judge John Tunheim, U.S. District Judge, District of Minnesota, discussed how to navigate institutional pressures and strengthen public confidence. He observed that as judges face increasing pressure, it is imperative to remember that it is something that comes with the territory.  He delineated actions that judges can take to prepare and remain safe, including reporting any potential physical threats, talking to trusted colleagues, taking necessary precautions, and having a plan in place, all while continuing to get the work done.

How are courts protecting judicial independence from internal pressure?

The first panel focused on judicial governance. The panel was centered around the internal challenges of maintaining judicial independence.  Panelists described some of the recent challenges they personally have faced with court leadership and how to respond constructively. The discussion brought together judges and experts from two regions, Latin America and the Balkans, which highlighted the similarity in the problems worldwide.

Judicial Selection Models Compared: North America, South America, and Europe

The second panel addressed the selection of new judges. Through the explanations from practicing judges from North America, South America, and Europe, the panel discussed the variety of models of judicial selection and how different appointment systems affected judicial independence, accountability, and trust. Many parallels could be drawn in the election procedures used in different regions, and the internal conflict that such elections consistently seemed to generate.

How Are Courts Using AI in 2026? Keeping Human Judgment at the Center

The third panel discussed the growing impact of AI in the judiciary, perhaps the most consequential change that judiciaries worldwide are facing today. Indeed, the panel noted that AI is beyond having a potential impact on the judiciary in the distant future; instead, it is a present reality. Sebastián Albuja, Federal Judicial Center of the United States, explained that AI is already universally present, and that judges use it in diverging degrees; however, many remain unsure of how to do so. Therefore, he mentioned that the Federal Judicial Center has created a toolkit to aid judges in learning when it is appropriate to use these technologies and how to do so. This toolkit answers judges’ needs through a user-centered design, and its focus is to allow for a judge-to-judge learning methodology. It is an ongoing process, since it must constantly evolve to remain accurate to the advancement of technology, and to avoid becoming outdated.  With panelists from different regions, the consensus was that courts must put in place procedures to confront this transformation now.

“The question is no longer whether AI will shape justice, but how — and on whose terms. Our task is to ensure those terms keep the decision in human hands.” Judge Ivana Hrdličková, High Court Prague, Senior Researcher, the Institute of Law and Technology, Masaryk University, former President of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon

Why Judicial Well-Being Is Now Recognized as a Pillar of Justice (CCJE Opinion No. 28)

The final panel focused further on the administration of justice, including an update on the development of the CEELI Institute's Guidelines on Improvement of Administration of Justice, which seek to compile international standards and principles into one manual to help judges know how to respond to specific issues. Additionally, Supreme Court Judge Egidija Tamošiūnienė of Lithuania took on judicial well-being, a topic that itself is being recognized as a pillar of justice in the Context of CCJE Opinion No. 28. Judge Tamošiūnienė identified specific issues that damage well-being and mentioned several recommendations for improving it.

Ioanna Lachana, Media Officer and Community Relations Manager of the European Court of Human Rights, focused on judicial communication with the media, its importance, and how to do so effectively. As she noted, judicial communication is a delicate topic but remains crucial and must be integrated into judicial administration.

The Conference provided valuable insights into different emerging topics affecting judiciaries across the world. There was a clear message throughout the forum: judges must maintain their independence, learn how to properly use new technologies, and communicate effectively with the public.

“What I love most about CEELI is the opportunity to connect with other judges and the feeling that you are not alone in facing challenges within your country’s judiciary.” Judge Katica Artuković, President at Cantonal Court in Široki Brijeg, Bosnia and Herzegovina