WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0

8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0

1/146

Te World Justice Project

Rule ofLaw Index

2010

A multidisciplinary, multinational

movement to advance the rule of

law for communities of opportunity

and equity

Mark David Agrast

Juan Carlos Botero

Alejandro Ponce

The World Jusce Project


2/146


3/146

Te World Justice ProjectRule ofLaw Index2010

Mark David Agrast

Juan Carlos Botero

Alejandro Ponce

With the collaboraon of:

Chantal V. Bright, Joel Marnez, and Chrisne S. Pra

The World Jusce Project


4/146

he WJP Rule of Law Indexwas made possible by generous support from:

he Neukom Family Foundationhe Bill & Melinda Gates FoundationGE Foundation

he Ewing Marion Kauffman FoundationLexisNexis

The World Justice Project

Board of Directors: Emil Constantinescu, Ashraf Ghani, William C. Hubbard, William H. Neukom, Ellen Gracie Northfleet,James R. Silkenat.

Officers:William C. Hubbard, Chairman of the Board; William H. Neukom, President and Chief Executive Officer; DeborahEnix-Ross, Vice President; Suzanne E. Gilbert, Vice President; James R. Silkenat, Vice President; Lawrence B. Bailey, Secretary;Roderick B. Mathews, reasurer; Gerold W. Libby, General Counsel.

Executive Director: Hongxia Liu.

Rule of Law Index 2010 Team: Mark David Agrast, Chair; Juan Carlos Botero, Director; Alejandro Ponce, Senior Economist;Chantal V. Bright; Joel Martinez; Christine S. Pratt; Katrina Moore; Oussama Bouchebti; Se Hwan Kim; Ivan Batishchev;Kate Coffey; Kristina Fridman; Juan Manuel Botero; Nathan Menon. Consultants: Jose Caballero, Patricia Ruiz de Vergara.

ISBN (print): 978-0-615-40781-4

Copyright 2010 by the World Justice Project. he WJP Rule of Law Index and he World Justice Project Rule of LawIndex are trademarks of the World Justice Project. All rights reserved. Requests to reproduce this document should be sentto Juan C. Botero, the World Justice Project, 740 Fif teenth Street, N.W. Suite 200, Washington, D.C. 20005 U.S.A. E-mail:

[email protected]

Graphic design: Nathaniel Kerksick and Joshua Steele.

Suggested citation: Agrast, M., Botero, J., Ponce, A. 2010. WJP Rule of Law Index. Washington, D.C.: he World JusticeProject.


5/146

ContentsExecutive Summary ..........................................................................1

Part I: Constructing the WJP Rule of Law Index..........................5

Part II: Te rule of law around the world .........................................17

Regional Highlights.......................................................... 18

Country Profiles ............................................................. 23

1. Groups by Income Level .................................................. 94

2. Groups by Region ......................................................... 100

Data Notes ................................................................... 107Te Joint Research Centre audit on the WJP Rule of Law Index ......113

Contributing Experts .......................................................................123

Acknowledgements ..........................................................................133

About Te World Justice Project .....................................................135


6/146


7/146

WJP RuleofLaw Index 2010

1

he WJP Rule of Law Index

he WJP Rule of Law Indexpresents a comprehensive setof new indicators on the rule of law from the perspectiveof the ordinary person. It examines practical situationsin which a rule of law deficit may affect the daily lives ofordinary people. For instance, the Index evaluateswhether

citizens can access public services without the need tobribe a government officer; whether a basic disputeamong neighbors or companies can be peacefully andcost-effectively resolved by an independent adjudicator; or

whether people can conduct their daily activities withoutfear of crime or police abuse.

he Index provides new data on the following 10dimensions of the rule of law:

Limited government powers

Absence of corruption

Clear, publicized and stable laws

Order and security

Fundamental rights

Open government

Regulatory enforcement

Access to civil justice

Effective criminal justice

Informal justice

hese 10 factors are further disaggregated into 49 sub-factors. he scores of these sub-factors are built from over700 variables drawn from assessments of the general public(1,000 respondents per country) and local legal experts.

he outcome of this exercise is one of the worlds mostcomprehensive data sets measuring the extent to whichcountries adhere to the rule of law-- not in theory but in

practice.

Executive Summary1he rule of law is the foundation for communitiesof opportunity and equityit is the predicate forthe eradication of poverty, violence, corruption,

pandemics, and other threats to civil society.William H. Neukom, Founder, President and

CEO of the World Justice Project

Advancing the rule of law around the world is thecentral goal of the World Justice Project. Establishing

the rule of law is fundamental to achieving communitiesof opportunity and equitycommunities that offersustainable economic development, accountablegovernment, and respect for fundamental rights. Withoutthe rule of law, medicines do not reach health facilitiesdue to corruption; women in rural areas remain unawareof their rights; people are killed in criminal violence; andfirms costs increase because of expropriation risk. herule of law is the cornerstone to improving public health,safeguarding participation, ensuring security, and fightingpoverty.

his report introduces the WJP Rule of Law Indexanew quantitative assessment tool designed to offer acomprehensive picture of the extent to which countriesadhere to the rule of law in practice.

Indices and indicators are very useful tools. he systematictracking of infant mortality rates, for instance, has greatlycontributed to improving health outcomes aroundthe globe. In a similar fashion, the WJP Rule of LawIndex monitors the health of a countrys institutional

environmentsuch as whether government officials areaccountable under the law, and whether legal institutionsprotect fundamental rights and allow ordinary peopleaccess to justice.

1 his report was made possible by the generous engagement of over 900 academics

and practitioners around the world who contributed their time and expertise, and the

35,000 individuals who participated in the general population poll.


8/146


2

New data.he Index findings are basedentirely on new data collected by the WJPfrom independent sources. his contrastsit with other indices based solely on dataaggregated from third party sources,or on sources that are self-reported bygovernments or other interested parties.

Rule of law in practice. he Indexmeasures adherence to the rule of law bylooking not to the laws as written but howthey are actually applied in practice.

Anchored in actual experiences.heIndex combines expert opinion withrigorous polling of the general publicto ensure that the findings reflect theconditions experienced by the population,including marginalized sectors of society.

Action oriented. Findings are presented

in disaggregated form, identifying strongand weak performers across the 10 rule oflaw dimensions examined in each country.

Despite these methodological strengths, the findings shouldbe interpreted in light of certain inherent limitations.An index provides a snapshot at a moment in time, butcannot convey a full picture of a countrys situation. Ruleof law analysis requires a careful consideration of multipledimensionswhich may vary from country to countryand a combination of sources, instruments, and methods.

his report introduces the framework of the WJP Ruleof Law Index and summarizes the results and lessonslearned during the WJPs implementation of the Index inan initial group of 35 countries. his coverage will expandto 70 countries in 2011 and 100 countries by 2012. As thefirst in an annual series, the 2010 WJP Rule of Law Indexis intended for a broad audience of policy makers, civilsociety, practitioners, academics, and other constituencies.

We hope that this new tool will help identify strengths and weaknesses in each country under review and encouragepolicy choices that advance the rule of law.

About the World Justice Project

he World Justice Project (WJP) is a multinational andmultidisciplinary effort to strengthen the rule of lawthroughout the world. It is based on two complementarypremises: first, the rule of law is the foundation forcommunities of opportunity and equity; and second,multidisciplinary collaboration is the most effective way to

Defining the rule of law

As used by the World Justice Project, the rule of lawrefers to a rules-based system in which the following fouruniversal principles are upheld:

he government and its officials andagents are accountable under the law;

he laws are clear, publicized, stable,and fair, and protect fundamental rights,including the security of persons andproperty;

he process by which the laws are enacted,administered, and enforced is accessible,fair, and efficient;

Access to justice is provided by competent,independent, and ethical adjudicators,

attorneys or representatives, and judicialofficers who are of sufficient number,have adequate resources, and reflect themakeup of the communities they serve.

hese principles are derived from international sourcesthat enjoy broad acceptance across countries with differingsocial, cultural, economic, and political systems; andincorporate both substantive and procedural elements.

Uses of the Index

he WJP Rule of Law Index is an instrument topromote advancement. It offers reliable, independent, anddisaggregated information for policy makers, businesses,non-governmental organizations, and other constituenciesto:

Assess a nations adherence to the rule oflaw in practice;

Identify a nations strengths and weaknesses in comparison to similarlysituated countries;

rack changes over time.

While the WJP Rule of Law Indexenters a crowded fieldof indicators on different aspects of the rule of law, it hasnew features that set it apart from others:

Comprehensive. While existing indicescover aspects of the rule of law, they do not

yield a full picture of rule of law compliance.


9/146

WJP RuleofLaw Index 2010

3

advance the rule of law.

In addition to the creation of a comprehensive Rule of LawIndex, the WJPs work is being carried out through theconvening of global and regional meetings of world leaders,the provision of seed grants for rule of law projects, andthe origination of new scholarship on rule of law issues.

he Projects efforts are dedicated to developing practicalprograms in support of the rule of law around the world.For further details, visit www.worldjusticeproject.org


10/146


11/146

Part I: Constructing theWJP Rule of Law IndexMark David Agrast1, Juan Carlos Botero, and Alejandro Ponce

The World Justice P roject2

1 Mr. Agrast did not participate in the collection and analysis or review of the data and results.2 his section builds on previous work developed in collaboration with Claudia J. Dumas


12/146


13/146

7

WJP Rule of Law Index 2010

Constructingthe WJP Rule ofLaw Index

he WJP Rule of Law Index is a new quantitativeassessment tool designed to offer a detailed andcomprehensive picture of the extent to which countriesadhere to the rule of law in practice.

he Index introduces new indicators on the rule of lawfrom the perspective of the ordinary person. It considerspractical situations in which a rule of law deficit mayaffect the daily lives of people. For instance, whetherpeople can access public services without the need tobribe a government officer; whether a basic disputeamong neighbors or companies can be peacefully andcost-effectively resolved by an independent adjudicator;or whether people can conduct their daily activities

without fear of crime or police abuse.

he Index provides new data on the following 10dimensions of the rule of law: limited government powers;absence of corruption; clear, publicized, and stable laws;order and security; fundamental rights; open government;regulatory enforcement; access to civil justice; effectivecriminal justice; and informal justice. hese ten factorsare further disaggregated into forty nine sub-factors.

he Indexs rankings and scores are the product of arigorous data collection and aggregation process. Data

comes from a global poll of the general publ ic and detailedquestionnaires administered to local experts. o date, over900 experts and 35,000 other individuals from around the

world have participated in this project.

he WJP Rule of Law Index 2010 is the culmination ofover three years of development, intensive consultation,and vetting with academics, practitioners, and communityleaders from over 100 countries and 17 professionaldisciplines. Version 1.0 of the Index was presented at

the first World Justice Forum in 2008, including findingsfrom a pilot conducted in six countries. Version 2.0

was presented at the second World Justice Forum in2009, featuring preliminary findings for 35 countries,including seven in the East Asia and Pacific region; fivefrom Eastern Europe and Central Asia; seven from LatinAmerica and the Caribbean; two from the Middle East

and North Africa; two from North America; two fromSouth Asia; five from Sub-Saharan Africa; and five from

Western Europe. ogether, these countries account for 45percent of the worlds population.

he WJP Rule of Law Index 2010 features a new version ofthe Index (version 3.0) and country profiles for the same35 countries. Data collection efforts are ongoing in 35additional countries, for a total of 70 countr ies, which willbe included in the 2011Index report. heIndex will cover100 countries by 2012.

It should be emphasized that the Index is intended to beapplied in countries with vastly differing social, cultural,economic, and political systems. No society has everattainedlet alone sustaineda perfect realization ofthe rule of law. Every nation faces the perpetual challengeof building and renewing the structures, institutions, andnorms that can support and sustain a rule of law culture.

Defining the rule of law he design of the Index began with the effort toformulate a set of principles that would constitute a

working definition of the rule of law. Having reviewedthe extensive literature on the subject, the project team

was profoundly conscious of the many challenges such aneffort entails. Among other things, it was recognized thatfor the principles to be broadly accepted, they must beculturally universal, avoiding Western, Anglo-American,or other biases. hus, the principles were derived to thegreatest extent possible from established international

standards and norms, and informed by a thorough reviewof national constitutions and scholarly literature. heprinciples and the factors derived from them were testedand refined through extensive consultations with expertsfrom around the world to ensure, among other things,their cultural competence.

It also was recognized that any effort to define the ruleof law must grapple with the distinction between whatscholars call a thin or minimalist conception of the rule of


14/146

8


J

f

law that focuses on formal, procedural rules, and a thickconception that includes substantive characteristics, suchas self-government and various fundamental rights andfreedoms. On the one hand, it was felt that if the Index wasto have utility and gain wide acceptance, the definition mustbe broadly applicable to many types of social and politicalsystems, including some which lack many of the features

that characterize democratic nations. On the other hand,it was recognized that the rule of law must be more thanmerely a system of rulesthat indeed, a system of positivelaw that fails to respect core human rights guaranteed underinternational law is at best rule by law, and does not deserveto be called a rule of law system. In the words of ArthurChaskalson, former Chief Justice of South Africa, [t]he apartheid government, its officers and agents wereaccountable in accordance with the laws; the laws wereclear; publicized, and stable, and were upheld by lawenforcement officials and judges. What was missing

was the substantive component of the rule of law. heprocess by which the laws were made was not fair (only

whites, a minority of the population, had the vote). Andthe laws themselves were not fair. hey institutionalizeddiscrimination, vested broad discretionary powers inthe executive, and failed to protect fundamental rights.

Without a substantive content there would be no answerto the criticism, sometimes voiced, that the rule of law isan empty vessel into which any law could be poured 1.

he four universal principles that emerged from our

deliberations are as follows:

I. he government and its officials and agentsare accountable under the law.

II. he laws are clear, publicized, stable, and fair,and protect fundamental rights, includingthe security of persons and property.

III. he process by which the laws are enacted,administered, and enforced is accessible, fair,

and efficient.

IV. Access to justice is provided by competent,independent, and ethical adjudicators,attorneys or representatives, and judicialofficers who are of sufficient number, haveadequate resources, and reflect the makeupof the communities they serve.

1 Remarks at the World Justice Forum I, held in Vienna, Austria in July 2008

hese principles represent an effort to strike a balance betweenthinner and thicker conceptions of the rule of law, incorporatingboth substantive and procedural elementsa decision which

was broadly endorsed by the many international experts withwhom we have consulted. A few examples may be instructive:

he principles address the extent to whicha country provides for fair participationin the making of the lawscertainly anessential attribute of self-government. Butthe principles do not address the furtherquestion of whether the laws are enactedby democratically elected representatives.

he principles address the extent to which a country protects fundamentalhuman rights. But given the impossibilityof assessing adherence to the full panoplyof civil, political, economic, social, cultural

and environmental rights recognized inthe Universal Declaration, the principlestreat a more modest menu of rights,primarily civil and political, that arefirmly established under international lawand bear the most immediate relationshipto rule of law concerns.

he principles address access to justice,but chiefly in terms of access to legalrepresentation and access to the courts,rather than in the thicker sense in

which access to justice is sometimesseen as synonymous with broadlegal empowerment of the poor anddisfranchised. Access to justice in thismore limited sense is a critical cornerstonefor the implementation of policies andrights that empower the poor.

In limiting the scope of the principles in this fashion, we donot wish to suggest any disagreement with a more robustand inclusive vision of self-government, fundamental rights,or access to justice, all of which are addressed in otherimportant and influential indices, as well as in various papersdeveloped by WJP scholars. Indeed, it is among the premisesof the project as a whole that a healthy rule of law is critical

to advancing such goals.

Moreover, the WJPs conception of the rule of law is notincompatible with the notion that these universal principlesmay interact with each other in multiple ways. Secondly,concrete improvements in one dimension of the rule oflaw may impact societies in more than one way, dependingon the prevailing cultural and institutional environments.It is our hope that by providing data on ten independentdimensions of the rule of law, theIndex will become a usefultool for academics and other constituencies to further ourglobal understanding of these interactions.


15/146

9


he WJP Rule of LawIndexM, version 3.0Version 3.0 of theIndex is composed of 10 factors derivedfrom the WJPs universal principles. hese factors aredivided into 49 sub-factors which incorporate essential

elements of the rule of law.

Factor 1: Limited Government Powers

1.1Government powers are effectively limited by thefundamental law

1.2Government powers are effectively limited by thelegislature

1.3Government powers are effectively limited by thejudiciary

1.4Government powers are effectively limited byindependent auditing and review

1.5 Government officials are sanctioned for misconduct

1.6 Freedom of opinion and expression

1.7 The State complies with international law

1.8Transition of power occurs in accordance with thelaw

Factor 2: Absence of Corruption

2.1Government officials do not request or receivebribes

2.2Government officials exercise their functionswithout improper influence

2.3Government officials do not misappropriate publicfunds or other resources

Factor 3: Clear, Publicized and Stable Laws

3.1 The laws are comprehensible to the public

3.2 The laws are publicized and widely accessible

3.3 The laws are stable

Factor 4: Order and Security

4.1 Crime is effectively controlled

4.2 Civil conflict is effectively limited

4.3People do not resort to violence to redress personal

grievances

Factor 5: Fundamental Rights

5.1Equal treatment and non-discrimination

are effectively guaranteed

5.2Right to life and security of the person is effectivelyprotected

5.3Due process of law and rights of the accused areeffectively protected

5.4Freedom of opinion and expression is effectivelyprotected

5.5 Freedom of belief and religion is effectively protected

5.6Freedom from arbitrary interference with privacy iseffectively guaranteed

5.7Freedom of assembly and association is effectivelyprotected

5.8 Fundamental labor rights are effectively protected

Factor 6: Open Government

6.1 Administrative proceedings are open to publicparticipation

6.2Official drafts of laws and regulations are availableto the public

6.3 Official information is available on request

Factor 7: Regulatory Enforcement

7.1 Government regulations are effectively enforced

7.2Government regulations are applied and enforcedwithout improper influence

7.3Due process is respected in administrative

proceedings

7.4The Government does not expropriate privateproperty without adequate compensation

Factor 8: Access to Civil Justice

8.1 People are aware of available remedies

8.2People can access and afford legal counsel in civildisputes

8.3 People can access and afford civil courts

8.4 Civil justice is impartial

8.5 Civil justice is free of improper influence

8.6 Civil justice is free of unreasonable delays

8.7 Civil justice is effectively enforced

8.8 ADR systems are accessible, impartial, and effective

Factor 9: Effective Criminal Justice

9.1 The criminal investigation system is effective

9.2The criminal adjudication system is timely andeffective

9.3The correctional system is effective in reducingcriminal behavior

9.4 The criminal system is impartial

9.5 The criminal system is free of improper influence

9.6Due process of law and rights of the accused areeffectively protected

Factor 10: Informal Justice

10.1 Informal justice systems are timely and effective

10.2Informal justice systems are impartial and free ofimproper influence

10.3Informal justice systems respect and protectfundamental rights


16/146

10


J

f

he four universal principles are reflected in the 10 factorsthat make up the Index.

Accountable Government

(Factors 1 and 2)

he first principle measures government accountabilityby means of two factors:

Factor 1: Limited Government Powers

Factor 2: Absence of Corruption

Limited Government Powers

he first factor measures the extent to which those whogovern are subject to law. It comprises the means, both

constitutional and institutional, by which the powers ofthe government and its officials and agents are limited andby which they are held accountable under the law. It alsoincludes nongovernmental checks on the governmentspower, such as a free and independent press.

his factor is particularly difficult to measure in astandardized manner across countries, since there is nosingle formula for the proper distribution of powersamong organs of the government to ensure that each isheld on check. Governmental checks take many forms;

they do not operate solely in systems marked by a formalseparation of powers, nor are they necessarily codifiedin law. What is essential is that authority is distributed,

whether by formal rules or by convention, in a mannerthat ensures that no single organ of government has thepractical ability to exercise unchecked power.2

he factor measures the effective limitation of governmentpowers in the fundamental law, including provisions thatprohibit unconstitutional amendments and suspensions ofconstitutional rights and privileges except in accordance

with the rules and procedures provided in the fundamentallaw itself; institutional checks on the government powerby the legislature, the judiciary and independent auditingand review agencies; effective sanctions for misconductof government officers and agents in all branches ofgovernment; non-governmental checks on government

2 he Index does not address the further question of whether the laws are enacted by

democratically elected representatives.

power; and compliance with international law.3

Absence of Corruption

he second factor measures the absence of corruption.he Index considers three forms of corruption: bribery,

improper influence by public or private interests, andmisappropriation of public funds or other resources.

hese three forms of corruption are examined withrespect to government officers in the executive branch(including the police and the military), and those in the

judiciary and the legislature. Our instruments take intoaccount a wide range of possible situations involvingcorruption, including the provision of public services,procurement procedures, and administrative enforcementof environmental, labor, and health and safety regulations,

among others.

Security and Fundamental

Rights (Factors 3, 4, and 5)

he second principle encompasses three factors:

Factor 3: Clear, Publicized and Stable Laws

Factor 4: Order and Security

Factor 5: Fundamental Rights

Clear, Publicized and Stable Laws

he third factor relates to the elements of clarity,publicity, and stability that are required for the publicto know what the law is and what conduct is permittedand prohibited. he law must be comprehensible and itsmeaning sufficiently clear, publicized, and explained tothe general public in plain language, for them to be able toabide by it. his is one of the most basic preconditions forachieving and maintaining a rule of law society capableof guaranteeing public order, personal security, andfundamental rights.

Order and Security

he fourth factor measures how well the society assures

3 Sub-factor 1.8 concerns whether transition of power occurs in accordance with the

law. Data on this sub-factor will be inc luded in country profiles starting with the WJP

Rule of Law Index 2011 report.


17/146

11


the security of persons and property.

It encompasses three dimensions: absence of crime;absence of political violence, including terrorism, armedconflict, and political unrest; and absence of violence as asocially acceptable means to redress personal grievances.

Fundamental Rights

he fifth factor measure protection of fundamentalhuman rights. It recognizes that the rule of law mustbe more than merely a system of rulesthat indeed, asystem of positive law that fails to respect core humanrights guaranteed and established under international lawis at best rule by law, and does not deserve to be called arule of law system.

Sixty years after its adoption, the Universal Declarationremains the touchstone for determining which rights maybe considered fundamental, even as newer rights continueto emerge and gain acceptance. At WJP regional meetingsconducted in 2008 and 2009, there was spirited discussionover which rights should be encompassed within theIndex. Many urged that the list be confined to civil andpolitical rights, particularly freedom of thought andopinion, which bear an essential relationship to the ruleof law itself. Others argued for a broader treatment that

would encompass social, economic, and cultural rights.

While the debate may never be fully resolved, it wasdetermined as a practical matter that since there are manyother indices that address human rights in all of thesedimensions, and as it would be impossible for the Indexto assess adherence to the full range of rights, the Indexshould focus on a relatively modest menu of rights thatare firmly established under international law, and aremost closely related to rule of law concerns. Accordingly,factor 5 covers laws that ensure equal protection4;freedom of thought, religion, and expression; freedom ofassociation (including the right to collective bargaining);

4 he laws can be fair only if they do not make arbitrary or irrational distinctions based

on economic or social statusthe latter defined to include race, color, ethnic or social

origin, caste, nationality, alienage, religion, language, political opinion or affiliation,

gender, marital status, sexual orientation or gender identity, age, and disability. It

must be acknowledged that for some societies, including some traditional societies,

certain of these categories may be problematic. In addition, there may be differences

both within and among such societies as to whether a given distinction is arbitrar y or

irrational. Despite these difficulties, it was determined that only an inclusive list would

accord full respect to the principles of equality and non-discrimination embodied in

the Universal Declaration and emerging norms of international law.

the prohibition of forced and child labor5; the right toprivacy and religion; the rights of the accused; and theretroactive application of the criminal laws.

Open Government and Regulatory

Enforcement (Factors 6 and 7)

he third principle includes two factors:

Factor 6: Open Government

Factor 7: Regulatory Enforcement

Factors 6 and 7 concern the extent to which the processby which the laws are enacted, administered, and enforcedis accessible, fair, and efficient. Among the indicia ofaccess are: whether proceedings are held with timely

notice and are open to the public; whether the lawmakingprocess provides an opportunity for diverse viewpointsto be considered; and whether records of legislative andadministrative proceedings and judicial decisions areavailable to the public. Fairness in the administration ofthe law includes, among other aspects, absence of improperinfluence by public officials or private interests, adherenceto due process of law in administrative procedures, andabsence of government taking of private property withoutadequate compensation6.

Access to Justice (Factors 8, 9, and 10)

he fourth and final principle measures access to justiceby means of three factors:

Factor 8: Access to Civil Justice

Factor 9: Effective Criminal Justice

Factor 10: Informal Justice

5 Sub-factor 5.8 includes the four fundamental principles recognized by the ILO

Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work of 1998: (1) the freedom

of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining; (2)

the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labor; (3) the effective abolition

of child labor; and (4) the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment

and occupation.6he Index addresses the extent to which a country provides for fair participation in

the making and administration of the lawscertainly an essential attribute of self-

government. But it does not address the further question of whether the laws are

enacted by democratically elected representatives.


18/146

12


J

f

hese factors measure whether ordinary people canpeacefully and effectively resolve their grievances inaccordance with generally accepted social norms, ratherthan resorting to violence or self-help.Access to civil justice requires that the system be affordable,effective, impartial, and culturally competent. Effective

criminal justice systems are capable of investigating andadjudicating criminal offences impartially and effectively,

while ensuring that the rights of suspects and victims areprotected.

Impartiality includes absence of arbitrary or irrationaldistinctions based on social or economic status, andother forms of bias, as well as decisions that are free ofimproper influence by public officials or private interests.Accessibility includes general awareness of availableremedies, availability and affordability of legal advice and

representation, and absence of excessive or unreasonablefees, procedural hurdles, and other barriers to accessformal dispute resolution systems. Access to justice alsorequires fair and effective enforcement.

Finally, factor 10 concerns the role played in manycountries by informal systems of law - includingtraditional, tribal, and religious courts and community-based systems - in resolving disputes. hese systemsoften play a large role in cultures in which formal legalinstitutions fail to provide effective remedies for large

segments of the population7.

Measuring the rule of law

he concept of rule of law is notoriously difficultto measure. One way to approach it is in terms of theoutcomes that the rule of law brings to societies forinstance, the effective protection of the freedom ofassociation of workers, or the successful indictment and

prosecution of people responsible for criminal acts. heseoutcomes, however, are wide ranging and embrace a largenumber of situations. he WJP Rule of Law Index is a first

7 Significant effort has been devoted during the last two years to collect data on

informal justice in a dozen countries. Nonetheless, the complexities of these systems

and the difficulties of measuring their fairness and effectiveness in a manner that is

both systematic and comparable across countries, make assessments extraordinarily

challenging. A preliminary overview of informal justice will be included in the WJP

Rule of Law Index 2011.

attempt to systematically and comprehensively quantifythese outcomes by linking the conceptual definitions toconcrete questions. hese questions are then administeredto a representative sample of the general public, and tolocal experts, and then are analyzed and cross-checkedpursuant to a rigorous triangulation methodology. heoutcome of this exercise is one of the worlds most

comprehensive data sets regarding adherence to the ruleof law in practice.


19/146

13


Data

he WJPs Rule of Law Index methodology utilizestwo main sources of new data: (i) a general populationpoll (GPP), designed by the World Justice Project andconducted by leading local polling companies using arepresentative sample of 1,000 respondents in three cities

per country ; and (ii) a qualified respondents questionnaire(QRQ) consisting of closedended questions completedby incountry practitioners and academics with expertisein civil and commercial law, criminal justice, labor law,and public health.

he QRQ is administered on a yearly basis in eachsurveyed country, and the GPP is carried out every three

years. In addition, existing domestic and internationaldata sources and legal resources are used to crosscheckthe findings.

he Index comprises more than 700 different variables,organized into ten factors and forty nine sub-factors.

hese variables are aggregated and compiled intonumerical scores.

o date, over 900 experts from 35 nations have contributedtheir knowledge and expertise to the Index. In addtionover 35,000 indivudials from these countries haveparticipated in the general population poll. he countriesindexed in this volume are presented in able 1. Data

presented in this volume was collected and analyzed inthe Fall of 2009. A detailed description of the process by

which data are collected and the rule of law is measured isprovided in the final section of this report and in Boteroand Ponce (2010).

Using the WJP Ruleof Law Index

he WJP Rule of Law Index is intended for multipleaudiences. It is designed to offer a reliable and independentdata source for policy makers, businesses, non-governmental organizations, and other constituencies to:

Assess a nations adherence to the ruleof law in practice (as it is perceived andexperienced by the average person);

Identify a nations strengths and weaknesses in comparison to similarlysituated countries;


20/146

14


J

f

rack changes over time.

While other indices touch on various aspects of the ruleof law, the WJP Rule of Law Index has new features thatset it apart from others:

Comprehensive. While existing indicescover aspects of the rule of law, they donot yield a full picture of rule of lawcompliance.

New data. he Index findings are based

Table 1: Countries indexed in 2010

Country Region Income Level

Albania Eastern Europe and Central Asia Lower middle

Argentina Latin America and Caribbean Upper middle

Australia East Asia and Pacific High

Austria Western Europe and North America High

Bolivia Latin America and Caribbean Lower middle

Bulgaria Eastern Europe and Central Asia Upper middle

Canada Western Europe and North America High

Colombia Latin America and Caribbean Lower middle

Croatia Eastern Europe and Central Asia Upper middle

Dominican Republic Latin Amer ica and Caribbean Lower middle

El Salvador Latin America and Caribbean Lower middle

France Western Europe and North America High

Ghana Sub-Saharan Africa Low

India South Asia Lower middle

Indonesia East Asia and Pacific Lower middle

Japan East Asia and Pacific High

Jordan Middle East and North Africa Lower middle

Kenya Sub-Saharan Africa Low

Liberia Sub-Saharan Africa Low

Mexico Latin America and Caribbean Upper middle

Morocco Middle East and North Africa Lower middle

Netherlands Western Europe and North America High

Nigeria Sub-Saharan Africa Low

Pakistan South Asia Low

Peru Latin America and Caribbean Lower middle

Philippines East Asia and Pacific Lower middle

Poland Eastern Europe and Central Asia Upper middle

Singapore East Asia and Pacific High

South Africa Sub-Saharan Africa Upper middle

South Korea East Asia and Pacific High

Spain Western Europe and North America High

Sweden Western Europe and North America High

Thailand East Asia and Pacific Lower middle

Turkey Eastern Europe and Central Asia Upper middle

United States Western Europe and North America High

entirely on new data collected by the WJP from independent sources. hiscontrasts with indices based solely ondata aggregated from third party sources,or on sources that are self-reported bygovernments or other interested parties.

Rule of law in practice. he Index

measures adherence to the rule of law bylooking not to the laws as written but tohow they are actually applied.

Anchored in actual experiences. heIndex combines expert opinion withrigorous polling of the general publicto ensure that the findings reflect theconditions experienced by the population,including marginalized sectors of society.

Action oriented. Findings are presentedin disaggregated form, identifying areas

of strength and weakness in each country.

hese features make the Index a powerful tool that caninform policy debates in and across countries. Yet theIndexs findings must be interpreted in light of certaininherent limitations.

1. he WJP Rule of Law Index does notprovide specific recipes or identifypriorities for reform.

2. he Index data are not intended toestablish causation or to ascertain the

complex relation among different rule oflaw dimensions in various countries.

3. he Indexs rankings and scores arethe product of a very rigorous datacollection and aggregation methodology.Nonetheless, as with all measures, they aresubject to measurement error.1

4. Indices and indicators are subject topotential abuse and misinterpretation.Once released to the public, they can takeon a life of their own and be used for

1 Users of the Index for policy debate who wish to have a sound understanding of its

methodology are encouraged to review the following WJP Working Papers:

a. Botero, J and Ponce, A. (2010) Measur ing the Rule of

Law. WJP Working Paper No. 1, available on-line at:

www.worldjusticeproject.org

b. Saisana, M and Saltelli, A. (2010) Sensitivity Analysis

of the WJP Rule of Law Index. WJP Working Paper

No. 2, available on-line at: www.worldjusticeproject.org


21/146

15


purposes unanticipated by their creators.If data are taken out of context, they canlead to unintended or erroneous policydecisions.

5. Rule of law concepts measured by theIndex may have different meanings acrosscountries. Users are encouraged to consult

the specific definition of the variablesemployed in the construction of the Index, which are discussed in greater detail inBotero and Ponce (2010).

6. heIndex is generally intended to be usedin combination with other instruments,both quantitative and quali tative. Just as inthe areas of health or economics no singleindex conveys a full picture of a countryssituation, policymaking in the area ofrule of law requires careful considerationof all relevant dimensionswhich may

vary from country to countryand acombination of sources, instruments andmethods. he Index does not provide afull diagnosis or dictate concrete prioritiesfor action.

7. Pursuant to the sensitivity analysis of theIndex data conducted in collaboration withthe Econometrics and Applied StatisticsUnit of the European Commissions JointResearch Centre, confidence intervalshave been calculated for all figuresincluded in the WJP Rule of Law Index2010. hese confidence intervals andother relevant considerations regardingmeasurement error are reported in Boteroand Ponce (2010) and Saisana and Saltelli(2010).

Complementarity withother WJP initiatives

he Index development is highly integrated with otherdimensions of the WJP. First, the Index findings for

a growing number of countries will be presented anddiscussed in detail every year at successive World JusticeForums. Second, many of the issues identified by theIndexin various countries will become fertile areas for the designof action plans or Opportunity Fund proposals by Forumparticipants. hird, the results of various OpportunityFund programs will be presented at each World JusticeForum, enabling a more detailed discussion of concreteissues covered by the Index. In some cases, OpportunityFund programs will serve as pilot projects to be expanded

into larger-scale interventions or replicated in additionalcountries. Fourth, detailed discussions on Index findingsat successive World Justice Forums and regional outreachmeetings will generate useful information for furtherrefinement of the Index methodology and measurement,as well as an opportunity to disseminate the results ofboth the Index and Opportunity Fund programs. Fifth,

WJP scholars provide conceptual and methodologicaladvice for the improvement and expansion of the Index,and theIndexs findings and data will be made available toresearchers around the world.

Next steps his volume presents the results and lessons learnedduring the WJPs implementation ofIndex version 3.0in 35 countries in 2009. he Index remains a work in

progress, with the next steps including:

Publication of topic-specific reports andother comparative materials.

Expanded coverage to include anadditional 35 countries (for a total of 70countries) by 2011, and a total of 100countries by 2012.


22/146

16


J

f


23/146

Part II: he rule of law around the worldJuan Carlos Botero, Chantal V. Bright, Joel Martinez, Alejandro Ponce, and Christine S. Pratt

The World Justice P roject


24/146

18


Theruleoflawaroundthewo

rld

Regional Highlights he following section provides an overview of regionaltrends revealed by the WJP Rule of Law Index in 2010.Adherence to the rule of law varies widely around the

world and appears to be positively correlated with per-capita income. here is also significant variation inoutcomes across regions. Countries in the Middle Eastand North Africa, for example, tend to have relativelylittle crime, but lag behind in offering an open process inthe making and administration of the laws. In contrast,countries in Sub-Saharan Africa display comparativestrengths in the area of open government, but face

challenges in fighting corruption. he average rankingsfor each region are shown in able 2.

Table 2: Average ranking by region

Sub-

Saharan

Africa

East Asia

& Pacific

Eastern

Europe &

Central

Asia

Western

Europe

& North

America

Latin

America

& the

Caribbean

Middle

East &

North

Africa

South

Asia

Factor 1: Limited Government Powers 23 12 25 5 25 24 24

Factor 2: Absence of Corruption 25 14 22 5 24 17 28

Factor 3: Clear, Publicized and Stable Laws 25 14 24 6 22 21 24

Factor 4: Order and Security 31 11 13 7 28 19 24

Factor 5: Fundamental Rights 25 14 20 5 24 27 28

Factor 6: Open Government 21 14 25 6 22 34 20

Factor 7: Effective Regulation/Administration 26 12 25 5 22 19 29

Factor 8: Access to Civil Justice 24 14 21 6 23 21 31

Factor 9: Effective Criminal Justice 24 11 19 6 30 16 28

Western Europe andNorth AmericaCountries in Western Europe and North America tend tooutperform most other countries in all dimensions. hesecountries are characterized by low levels of corruption,

with open and accountable governments, and effectivecriminal justice systems. In most dimensions, countriesin Western Europe obtain higher scores than the UnitedStates. For example, Sweden, the Netherlands, Austria,and France receive among the best marks in terms ofabsence of corruption and access to civil justice. Incontrast, most countries in Western Europe do not doas well as the United States and Canada with regardto providing opportunities for the public to voice theirconcerns and participate in the law making process.

he greatest weakness in Western Europe and North Americaappears to be related to the accessibility of the civil justicesystem. In the area of access to legal counsel, for instance, theUnited States ranks 20th, while Sweden ranks 17th. heseare areas that require attention from both policy makers andcivil society to ensure that all people, including marginalizedgroups, are able to benefit from the civil justice system.


25/146

19


Latin America andthe CaribbeanLatin America presents a picture of sharp contrasts.

While many countries in the region stand out amongstdeveloping nations across the globe in protecting freedom

of thought, most Latin American countries have thehighest crime rates in the world. For instance, the five-

year homicide rate in the Latin American countriesincluded in this report is 69 per 100,000 people, muchhigher than the average figure for Western Europe andNorth America (9), South Asia (20) and the Middle Eastand North Africa (3).

he high crime rates in the region may be related to thegenerally poor performance of the criminal investigationand adjudication systems (police investigators, prosecutors

and judges). Indeed, the criminal systems of most LatinAmerican countries rank among the worst in the world. InMexico, for instance, 93% of the perpetrators of burglaryincidents were not punished. In addition, the effectivenessof criminal systems throughout the region is affected bycorruption and improper influence by powerful privateand public interests.

East Asia and Pacifiche East Asia and Pacific region displays a heterogeneouspicture. Wealthier countries such as Japan, Australia,Singapore, and South Korea score high in mostdimensions. In contrast, Indonesia, the Philippines, and

hailand generally rank significantly lower than the

wealthier countries in the region; however, they performrelatively well in comparison to countries from otherregions of the world with similar income levels.

Singapore is the top-ranked country amongst the indexedcountries in providing security and access to civil justiceto its citizens. Yet it ranks very low in terms of open

government, limited government powers, and fundamentalrights. Japan performs well in most dimensions, but facesseveral challenges in access to justice. he high costsimposed by courts and lawyers, for instance, place Japan23rd out of 35 in terms of accessibility and affordability ofcivil procedures. In contrast, South Korea ranks 5th in thisfactor, but exhibits weaknesses in areas such as sanctionsfor police misconduct and freedom of opinion andexpression. Indonesia ranks fairly high on the clarity of itslaws, but poorly on corruption and access to civil justice.In contrast, the Philippines falls within the bottom half

of the rankings, even when compared to similarly situatedcountries, particularly in the areas of stable laws, access to

justice, and corruption.

South Asiahe WJP Rule of Law Index covers only two countriesin this region in 2010: India and Pakistan. Indiaoutperforms Pakistan in most dimensions, although

when compared to countries with similar income levels,

it only shows an average performance. India ranks at thetop among lower-middle income countries in terms ofgovernment accountability, clear and stable laws, and opengovernment. Yet India still needs to eliminate deficienciesin terms of access to justice, particularly in the areas ofcourt congestion and delays in processing cases, wherethe country ranks at the very bottom. Pakistan shows

weaknesses in most areas, where low levels of governmentaccountability are compounded by the prevalence ofcorruption, a weak justice system, and high levels of crimeand violence.

Eastern Europe andCentral AsiaMost countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asiafall in the middle of the Index rankings. Poland is theleading country among the indexed economies in theregion, and ranks at the top of upper-middle incomecountries in most dimensions. Croatia and Bulgaria


26/146

20



rld

main strengths of these countries can be found in twoareas: order and security and effectiveness of the criminal

justice system. With regard to security, Jordan andMorocco are characterized by low levels of crime. Yet, bothcountries fall behind in offering accessible mechanismsfor the enactment and administration of the laws, where

Jordan ranks 35th out of 35 countries and Morocco ranks

33rd. In both countries, citizens have serious difficultiesin accessing official documentation, including budgetfigures and government contracts (see Box 2).

Sub-Saharan Africahe WJP Rule of Law Index Report 2010 covers fivecountries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Similar to East Asia andthe Pacific, the region exhibits a range of performancelevels, with South Africa and Ghana as the regional

leaders, and the rest of the countries positioned at thebottom of the global ranking.

perform particularly well on public security, however,both countries display lower scores on the effectivenessof the criminal system; Bulgaria, for instance, ranks 33rdout of the 35 indexed countries in terms of timely andeffective prosecution. Croatia also faces difficulties inenforcing regulation. In contrast, urkey shows a higher-than-average performance on the effectiveness of the

judicial system, but efforts are still required in the areasof fundamental rights, particularly as regards freedom ofopinion and expression, and freedom of religion.

Middle East andNorth Africa

his report covers only two countries in the Middle Eastand North Africa region: Morocco and Jordan. In most

areas, both countries display average scores, althoughJordan is generally better positioned than Morocco. he

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.50EUR & NA EAP SA AFR LAC ECA MENA

Source: WJP Rule of Law Index 2010, where higher scores signify a higher adherence to the rule of law

Open government around the worldScores by sub-factor and region

Sub-factor 6.3: Official information requested is available

Sub-factor 6.2: Official drafts of laws and regulations available to the public

Sub-factor 6.1: Administrative proceedings open to public participation


27/146

21


South Africa is the country with the best rule of lawoutcomes in Sub-Saharan Africa. he country is wellpositioned in most dimensions, including accountability,regulatory enforcement, and access to justice, particularly

when compared with countries at similar stages ofeconomic development. he biggest challenge for thecountry is the lack of security and the prevalence of crime,

where South Africa ranks at the bottom.

Ghana is positioned as a country with reasonable checksand balances and where fundamental rights are respected.Nonetheless, the country still has significant weaknessesin areas such as regulatory enforcement and corruption.Moreover, as in other Sub-Saharan countries, violenceis still one of the main means of redressing grievances.Finally, Kenya, Liberia, and Nigeria suffer from a rule of

law deficit. Although the specifics vary in each country,Kenya, Liberia, and Nigeria need to advance in most rule

MEX

COL GHA

USA ARG

PERPAK

FRAESP

SGPJPNCAN

NLDIND

HRV

MARKOR

THA

BOLTUR

ZAF

SLV

NGA

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

20%15%10%5%0%

Source: WJP Rule of Law Index 2010

Note: The dotted line represents a 45 degree line

Equal protection?

Percentage of respondents who were unfairly physically abused

by the police in the last three years, by income quintile

PHL

Low Income (Bottom quintile)

HighIncome(Topquintile)

25% 100%80%60%40%20%0%

Low Income (Bottom quintile)

MEX

COL

GHA

USA

ARGPER

PAK

FRA

DOM

ESP

SGPJPN

CAN

NLD

IND

HRV

MAR

KOR

THA

BOL

TUR

ZAFSLV

NGA

PHL

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

HighIncome(Topquintile)

Source: WJP Rule of Law Index 2010

Note: The dotted line represents a 45 degree line

Is corruption regressive?

Percentage of respondents who believe they have to pay a bribe or

other inducements to obtain a land ownership title, by income quintile


28/146

22



rld

of law dimensions, including government accountability,corruption, crime and violence, regulatory enforcement,and access to justice.

Conclusion hese highlights demonstrate not only that differentcountries face different realities, depending on the levelof economic, institutional, and political development; butalso that no country has attained a perfect realization ofthe rule of law. Every nation faces the perpetual challengeof building and renewing the structures, institutions, andnorms that can support and sustain a culture centered onthe rule of law.

he Country Profiles in the next section of this reportoffer detailed information on each countrys scores by

factor and sub-factor and provide comparisons withregional and socioeconomic peers. It is the WJPs hopethat by providing a comprehensive picture of eachcountrys situation with regard to the components of theWJP Rule of Law Index, we deliver a tool that can helppolicy makers, businesses, and civil society to identifytrends, make arguments for action regarding importantpublic policy issues, and place their countrys performancerelative to others at the center of the policy discourse.


29/146

23

WJP Rule of Law Index2010

Country Profiles his section presents country profiles for the 35countries included in the administration of theIndexin 2009.

How to Read theCountry ProfilesEach country profile consists of three sections that presentthe featured countrys scores for each of the WJP Rule of Law Indexs nine factors, the countrys scores for the sub-factors, and a snapshot of several key rule of law outcomesexperienced by people in the featured country. he firstsection of each country profile also draws comparisons

between the scores of the featured country, and thescores of other indexed countries that share regional andsocioeconomic similarities.

Section 1Scores for the

Rule of Law Factors

he table in Section 1 displays the featured countrysaggregate scores by factor1, and the countrys rankingsfor the factors in comparison with its regional andsocioeconomic peers. he table is organized as follows:

the first column lists the first nine factors that makeup the Index. he second column displays the countrysaggregate score for each of the nine factors. he thirdcolumn displays the countrys global ranking for eachfactor. he fourth column exhibits the ranking achievedby the featured country within the region. Finally, thefifth column shows the ranking among countries withcomparable per capita income levels.

Section 2he Rule of Law as

Experienced by the Peoplehe charts in Section 2 provide a snapshot of key rule oflaw outcomes in the featured country as experienced bythe people in their daily lives. he charts display selected

1 All variables used to score each of the nine independent factors were coded and re-

scaled to range between 0 and 1, where 1 signifies the highest score and 0 signifies the

lowest score. he average scores of the re-scaled variables were later normalized using

the Min-Max method. Individual variables tapping the same concept were averaged

and then aggregated into factors and sub-factors, using arithmetic averages. hese

scores are the basis of the final rank ings.

data from the General Population Poll. he GeneralPopulation Poll was carried out on a probability sample of1,000 respondents drawn from the three largest cities ineach country. he poll was designed by the World JusticeProject, and field-work was conducted by leading localpolling companies on behalf of the World Justice Projectduring September 2009.

Section 3 Disaggregated Scores

Section 3 displays four graphs that show the countrysdisaggregated scores for each of the sub-factors thatcompose the WJP Rule of Law Index. Each graph showsa circle that corresponds to one concept measured by theIndex2 . Each sub-factor is represented by a radius runningfrom the center of the circle to the periphery. he centerof each circle corresponds to the lowest possible score for

each sub-factor (0.00) and the outer edge of the circlemarks the highest possible score for each sub-factor(1.00). Higher scores signify a higher adherence to therule of law.

he country scores are shown in blue. he graphs alsoshow the average scores of all countries indexed withinthe region (in green) and all countries indexed withcomparable per capita income levels (in red). As a pointof reference, the graphs also show the score achievedfor each sub-factor by the top performer amongst all 35

countries indexed (in violet).

his version of the WJP Rule of Law Index does notinclude scores for the following sub-factors: Sub-factor1.1 Government powers are defined in the fundamentallaw; Sub-factor 1.7 he state complies with internationallaw; Sub-factor 1.8 ransition of power is subject tothe law; Sub-factor 2.3 Government officials do notmisappropriate entrusted public resources; Sub-factor 4.2Absence of armed conflict, coups, and terrorism; Sub-factor5.7 Freedom of assembly and association; Sub-factor 7.3Due process is respected in administrative proceedings;Sub-factor 8.1 People are aware of available remedies and;Sub-factor 9.3 Correctional system is effective in reducingcriminal behavior. In the case of Jordan, due to missing

variables in the GPP, this report does not include scoresfor Sub-factor 9.1 Criminal investigation is effective. Weanticipate that all the above sub-factors will be includedin the WJP Rule of Law Index Report 2011.

2 Accountable Government, Security and Fundamental Rights, Open Government

and Regulatory Enforcement, and Access to Justice.


30/146

1. WJP Rule of Law Index

The Rule of Law Index

summarizes findings

across the countrys three

largest urban centers.

2. The rule of law as experienced by the people

Mechanisms selected to enforce a contract orto recover a debt (courts vs. other)

% of respondents having experienced a conflict involving a contract or debt in the last 3 years

This table presents aggregate scores by factor for each country in comparison with its regional and socioeconomic

peers.

Population

1 This report summarizes the findings of

the WJP Rule of Law Index in the three

largest urban centers in each country. For

a description of the methodology, see the

data notes of this report. All figures are

normalized from 0 to 1, where 1 signifies

higher adherence to the rule of law.

24

Respondents who experienced a homeburglary in the last three years

% of total

The media are free to express opinionsagainst government policies and actions

% of respondents who agree/disagree

Reported the crime to

the police

Did not report the crime

to the police

Strongly agree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly disagree

No action Other

Commercial arbitration procedure Traditional or local leader Direct renegotiation

Court lawsuit

Length of time to solve the conflictor get money back (court only)

The following charts provide a snapshot of key rule of law outcomes as experienced by the people in their daily lives. The charts display

data from a poll of 1,000 respondents in Tirana, Durres, and Elbasan. The poll was designed by the World Justice Project, and field-work

was conducted by a leading local company during September 2009.

21%

6%

46%

27%

Yes,

6%

No,

94%

56%

44%

3%

51%

8%

19%

16%

4%

7% Less than 1month

15% Between 1month and 1 year

35% Morethan 3 years

16% Between 1

and 3 years

15% NeverResolved

13% Dont know

Score Global Ranking Regional Ranking Income Group Ranking

Factor 1: Limited Government Powers 0.41 28/35 3/5 11/12

Factor 2: Absence of Corruption 0.28 31/35 5/5 12/12

Factor 3: Clear, Publicized, and Stable Laws 0.43 25/35 3/5 9/12

Factor 4: Order and Security 0.77 14/35 3/5 1/12

Factor 5: Fundamental Rights 0.58 22/35 4/5 5/12

Factor 6: Open Government 0.19 34/35 5/5 11/12

Factor 7: Regulatory Enforcement 0.35 32/35 5/5 12/12

Factor 8: Access to Civil Justice 0.44 31/35 5/5 11/12

Factor 9: Effective Criminal Justice 0.50 22/35 4/5 6/12

46% Urban

29% in three

largest cities

3 Mil. (2008)

Eastern Europe& Central AsiaRegion

Lower MiddleIncome

Albania Tirana, Durres, Elbasan1

Court lawsuit


31/146


Security and Fundamental Rights

Open Government and

Regulatory Enforcement

Access to Justice

Key

Each of the four circles corresponds to one band of the Index. In each graph, a sub-factor is represented by a radius from the center of the

circle to the periphery. The center of each circle corresponds to the lowest possible score for each sub-factor (0.00); the outer edge of the

circle marks the highest possible score (1.00).

3.1 Laws are clear

3.2 Laws are publicized

3.3 Stable laws

4.1 Absence

of crime

4.3 People do

not resort to

violence to

redress grievances

5.1 Equal treatment

and absence of

discrimination5.2 Right to life

and security of

the person

5.3 Due process of law

5.4 Freedom of

opinion and expression

5.5 Freedom of thought

and religion

5.6 Arbitraryinterference

of privacy

5.8 Fundamental

labor rights

1.2 Government powers limited by legislature

1.4 Independent

auditing and

review

1.5 Government

officials sanctioned

for misconduct

1.6 Freedom of opinion

and expression

2.1 Government

officials do not

request or

receive bribes

2.2 Government

officials do not

exert improper

influence

8.2 People can access

legal counsel


and afford civil courts

8.4 Civil justice is

impartial

8.5 Civil justice

is free of

improper

influence


not subject to

unreasonable

delays


effectively enforced8.8 ADRs are

accessible,

impartial, and

effective

9.1 Criminal

investigation system

is effective

9.2 Criminal adjudication

system is timely

and effective

9.4 Criminalsystem is impartial

9.5 Criminal system

is free of improper

influence


and rights of the accused

6.1 Administrative

proceedings open

to participation

6.2 Official drafts

of laws and

regulations are

available

7.1 Government

regulations enforced

7.2 Government

regulations

without improper

influence

7.4 The Government

does not

expropriate without

adequate

compensation

6.3 Official

information

requested is

available

2 These four charts display the countrys score for each of the sub-

factors in the WJP Rule of Law Index. A score of zero for a given

sub-factor signifies that the country obtained the lowest score among

the 35 countries indexed for every indicator composing that sub-

factor. The chart also shows the average score of all countries indexed

within its region; all countries indexed with comparable per capita

income levels; and the score achieved by the top performer among

all countries indexed.

25

0.0

1.3 Government powers

limited by judiciary

3. Scores for all WJP Rule of Law Indexsub-factors2

Lower Middle Income Eastern Europe & Central Asia

Albania Top Score1.0

0.5

0.0

1.0

0.5

0.0

1.0

0.5

0.0

1.0

0.5

0.0

Albania


32/146


summarizes findings







peers.

Population

Income









% of total




the police


to the police

No action Other


Region



26

3%

31%

69%

No,

82%

Yes,

18%

4% Dont know

26% NeverResolved


20% Between 1and 3 years


4% Less than 1month

61%

28%

2%

8%

28%

15%











The following charts provide a snapshot of key rule of law outcomes as experienced by the people in their daily lives. The charts display data

from a poll of 1,000 respondents in Buenos Aires, Crdoba, and Rosario. The poll was designed by the World Justice Project, and field-work


92% Urban

36% in three

largest cities

40 Mil. (2008)

Latin America &the Caribbean

Upper Middle

Buenos Aires, Crdoba, Rosario1Argentina

38%Court lawsuit

9%

8%

Strongly agree Agree

Disagree Strongly disagree


33/146



Open Government and


Access to Justice

Key





3.1 Laws are clear


3.3 Stable laws

4.1 Absence

of crime

4.3 People do

not resort to

violence to

redress grievances

5.1 Equal treatment

and absence of


and security of

the person


5.4 Freedom of



and religion


of privacy

5.8 Fundamental

labor rights




1.4 Independent

auditing and

review

1.5 Government


for misconduct


and expression

2.1 Government

officials do not

request or

receive bribes

2.2 Government

officials do not

exert improper

influence


legal counsel




impartial

8.5 Civil justice

is free of

improper

influence


not subject to

unreasonable

delays



accessible,

impartial, and

effective

9.1 Criminal


is effective


system is timely

and effective


9.5 Criminal system

is free of improper

influence



6.1 Administrative

proceedings open

to participation

6.2 Official drafts

of laws and

regulations are

available

7.1 Government


7.2 Government

regulations

without improper

influence

7.4 The Government

does not

expropriate without

adequate

compensation

6.3 Official

information

requested is

available









0.0

United States

27

Upper Middle Income Latin America & the Caribbean

Argentina Top Score1.0

0.5

0.0

1.0

0.5

0.0

1.0

0.5

0.0

1.0

0.5

0.0

Argentina


34/146



summarizes findings







peers.

Population

HighIncome








28


% of total




the police


to the police

Strongly agree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly disagree

No action Other


Court lawsuit

Region


16% 10% Dont know

24% NeverResolved

5% More than3 years



7% Less than 1month

5%9%

27%

15%

28%

Yes,

10%

No,

90%

12%

88%

63%

6%

30%

1%


from a poll of 1,000 respondents in Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane. The poll was designed by the World Justice Project, and field-work












89% Urban

46% in three

largest cities

22 Mil. (2008)

East Asia &Pacific

Australia Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane1

Court lawsuit


35/146



Open Government and


Access to Justice

Key





3.1 Laws are clear


3.3 Stable laws

4.1 Absence

of crime

4.3 People do

not resort to

violence to

redress grievances

5.1 Equal treatment

and absence of


and security of

the person


5.4 Freedom of



and religion


of privacy

5.8 Fundamental

labor rights




1.4 Independent

auditing and

review

1.5 Government


for misconduct


and expression

2.1 Government

officials do not

request or

receive bribes

2.2 Government

officials do not

exert improper

influence


legal counsel




impartial

8.5 Civil justice

is free of

improper

influence


not subject to

unreasonable

delays



accessible,

impartial, and

effective

9.1 Criminal


is effective


system is timely

and effective


9.5 Criminal system

is free of improper

influence



6.1 Administrative

proceedings open

to participation

6.2 Official drafts

of laws and

regulations are

available

7.1 Government


7.2 Government

regulations

without improper

influence

7.4 The Government

does not

expropriate without

adequate

compensation

6.3 Official

information

requested is

available









29

0.0

United States

High Income East Asia & Pacific

Australia Top Score

1.0

0.5

0.0

1.0

0.5

0.0

1.0

0.5

0.0

1.0

0.5

0.0

Australia


36/146



summarizes findings







peers.

Population

HighIncome








30


% of total




the police


to the police

Strongly agree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly disagree

No action Other


Court lawsuit

Western Europe& North AmericaRegion


10% Dont know

22% NeverResolved




3% Less than 1month

3%

3%

20%

23%

1%

51%

No,

85%

Yes,

15%

11%

89%49%12%

35%

4%


from a poll of 1,000 respondents in Wien, Graz, and Linz. The poll was designed by the World Justice Project, and field-work was conducted

by a leading local company during September 2009.











67% Urban

35% in three

largest cities

8 Mil. (2008)

Austria Wien, Graz, Linz1

Court lawsuit


37/146



Open Government and


Access to Justice

Key





3.1 Laws are clear


3.3 Stable laws

4.1 Absence

of crime

4.3 People do

not resort to

violence to

redress grievances

5.1 Equal treatment

and absence of


and security of

the person


5.4 Freedom of



and religion


of privacy

5.8 Fundamental

labor rights




1.4 Independent

auditing and

review

1.5 Government


for misconduct


and expression

2.1 Government

officials do not

request or

receive bribes

2.2 Government

officials do not

exert improper

influence


legal counsel




impartial

8.5 Civil justice

is free of

improper

influence


not subject to

unreasonable

delays



accessible,

impartial, and

effective

9.1 Criminal


WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0

Documents

Transcript of WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0