On behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), GIZ’s Sino-German Legal Cooperation Programme organized a study tour to Germany and Spain for a delegation from the National Judges’ College from 16 to 23 June 2024. The five-member delegation was led by Mr. LI Chengbin, Head of the Teaching and Research Department for Civil and Commercial Litigation at the National Judges’ College. The National Judges’ College is a training center for judges from all over China and is directly subordinate to the Supreme People’s Court. The aim of the trip was to convey to the delegation the professional image of the judge, which is one of the essential foundations of the rule of law in Germany and Spain.
The delegation began with a visit to the German Bundestag in Berlin, where they learned about the composition and workings of the German parliament. Afterwards, Dr. Johannes Schlichte, presiding judge at the Hamburg Regional Court, presented Germany’s federal structure and how the judiciary is embedded in the state structure. Dr. Schlichte explained the legislative process in Germany and the cooperation between the Federal Government and the Federal Council. He also explained the court structure and the position of judges, including their constitutionally guaranteed independence.
The next day, the delegation attended a court hearing at the Berlin Mitte district court, which was chaired by Ms. Katrin Kutschera, a judge at the district court. The focus was on a traffic law case, which gave the delegation a practical insight into how the German legal system works. After the hearing, an expert discussion took place with Ms. Kutschera, Dr. Ragna Kretschmer, judge at the Berlin-Mitte district court, and Ms. Marianne Krause, judge at the Kreuzberg district court. The discussion covered topics such as the enforcement of assets, the difficulties in determining the assets of debtors and the challenges in enforcement proceedings. Frequent points of contention in tenancy law and sanctions for traffic offenses were also discussed. The delegation was particularly interested in the procedures and duration of proceedings at German courts.
On June 19, the delegation held an expert discussion with Mr. Guido Tiesel, Senior Ministerial Councillor from the Bavarian State Ministry of Justice, at the Palace of Justice in Munich. Mr. Tiesel explained the legal training and examinations in Bavaria and emphasized that all legal practitioners, i.e. judges, public prosecutors and attorneys, have undergone the same training in Germany. He particularly emphasized the two-part training, consisting of university studies and the legal clerkship, which is completed by two state examinations. The delegation was particularly interested in the requirements that Bavaria places on prospective judges and public prosecutors.
On the afternoon of June 19, the delegation was welcomed by Mr. Christian Steib, Vice President of the Munich Higher Regional Court, and judges Edith Paintner and Bernhard Gerok. Mr. Steib explained the special features of the Bavarian judicial system, including the mandatory rotation between judicial and prosecutorial activities in the first three years of the profession. This serves the development of personnel and offers legal practitioners valuable experience in both areas. The delegation’s questions mainly concerned career opportunities and the promotion process within the Bavarian judiciary.
On June 20, the delegation had a discussion with Ms. Ida Mödl, Senior Ministerial Councillor from the Bavarian State Ministry of Justice, about the career path of judges in the Free State of Bavaria. Ms. Mödl explained the recruitment process and the duties of judges, emphasizing the importance of the probationary period and the official appraisals for the professional career.
Public prosecutor Tanja Wagner from the Bavarian State Ministry of Justice presented the German Judges’ College and explained the training programs for judges and public prosecutors in Germany. She particularly highlighted interdisciplinary training courses that cover psychological and ethical aspects, as well as special training courses for judges who are involved in proceedings involving children. In particular, the delegation asked about training measures to ensure that judges remain up to date with the latest case law and legislation.
In the afternoon, the discussion with Dr. Nicola Grau, Presiding Judge at Munich Regional Court I, focused on the law governing the service of judges and the duties of the Steering Committee of the court, in particular the distribution of official duties and the supervision of judges. Dr. Grau emphasized that, in order to protect the independence of judges, supervision does not include a review of the content of decisions, but only organizational and administrative aspects. She also explained how important it is in Germany for the principle of the statutory judge that each case is assigned to the competent collegial panel in accordance with abstract rules defined in advance. This is to prevent the management of a court from influencing the decision by assigning individual cases to certain collegial panels.
On June 21, the delegation met Mr. José Pablo Carrera Fernández, Head of the Department of External and Institutional Relations at the Escuela Judicial, the Spanish Judicial Academy, in Barcelona. He presented the very practice-oriented training of judges in Spain. The presentation of simulations and internships in various courts met with particular interest. A central topic was the safeguarding of judicial independence throughout the entire career.
In the afternoon, Professor Xavier Arbós Marín, an expert in constitutional law at the University of Barcelona, explained the constitutional guarantees for the independence of the judiciary in Spain and the function of the General Council of the Judiciary, which is responsible for the appointment and promotion of judges. In the ensuing discussion, the delegation asked questions in particular about the mechanisms that ensure the independence of the judiciary in Spain and are intended to rule out political influence in the appointment of judges.