The control activity of the inspectorate represents a positive contribution to improving judicial discipline and accountability as such activities had not existed before.[21] At the same time, the work of the inspectorate has not been directed at promoting solutions to the systematic shortcomings in accountability and judicial practice.

8. Emphasises the key importance of the principles of the rule of law; stresses the vital importance of an independent judiciary; notes that, while some progress has been made in the area of judiciary, namely in adopting rules for evaluating judges and prosecutors, political interference remains high; notes that the professional judicial bodies are demanding to be provided with adequate resources; calls on the authorities to implement the national judicial reform strategy as set out in the action plan for Chapter 23 and to ensure independence of the judiciary and that the work of judges and prosecutors is free from political influence; calls on the government to adopt a new law on free legal aid and to introduce legal changes to addres ...[+++]s the quality and consistency of judicial practice and judicial education; expresses concern at the continuous backlog of court cases, despite the Supreme Court of Cassation’s reduction programme in this regard, and urges Serbia to make further steps in order to increase confidence in the judiciary;

N. whereas these recent judicial practices cast serious doubts on the independence of the judicial system and on its ability to ensure accountability; whereas, in particular, these sentences resulting in the death penalty risk undermining the prospects for long-term stability in Egypt;

I. whereas these recent judicial practices cast serious doubts on the independence of the judicial system and on its ability to ensure accountability; whereas, in particular, these sentences resulting in the death penalty risk undermining the prospects for long-term stability in Egypt;

8. Takes the view that the pilot project should encompass the creation of a working group comprising national and European judicial training providers as well as extra-judicial actors, whose aim would be to identify a series of thematic ‘clusters’ of EU law issues, which seem to be the most relevant for everyday judicial practice, both on ‘practical’ matters (how to submit a request for preliminary ruling, how to access EU law databases, etc.), and on matters of substance;

22. Notes the commitment by the European Council and the Commission to adopt by December 2000 a programme of measures to implement the principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions and the necessary approximation of legislation in both civil and criminal matters, and urges that this should include measures to ensure consistent and adequate standards of legal and judicial practice throughout the Union including the provision of legal aid and the establishment of a “Euro-bail” system enabling those charged to go home while awaiting trial; stresses that the principle of mutual recognition has to be complemented by the agreeing of m ...[+++]inimum standards in order to improve confidence in other judicial systems;