The right to a reasoned judicial decision forms an integral part of the right to a fair trial guaranteed by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Adequate judicial reasoning is closely linked to procedural fairness and the proper administration of justice. While providing reasons for a judgment is both a right of the parties and an obligation of the judge, insufficient or inadequate reasoning may raise concerns of arbitrariness and, in certain circumstances, result in a denial of justice.

To strengthen the capacity of legal practitioners in Kosovo*[1], the project, in cooperation with the Justice Academy, organised a training on the Reasoning of Judicial Decisions for judges and prosecutors from ordinary courts. The activity brought together 36 judges from ordinary courts across all jurisdictions, as well as prosecutors from several prosecution offices. The training was delivered with the support of two experienced judges of the Supreme Court.

The training provided an opportunity for participants to exchange with the trainers on the principles and methodologies governing the preparation of judicial decisions in civil and criminal proceedings. Particular attention was paid to the analytical process underpinning the drafting and reasoning of judgments and to the need for judicial decisions to be clear, coherent and properly grounded in law and evidence.

Participants were introduced to the IRAC methodology – Issue, Rule, Application and Conclusion – as a practical framework for structuring judicial reasoning. The methodology was illustrated through practical examples from civil and criminal cases, enabling participants to examine how the different elements of a judgment should be logically connected. Discussions covered both the formal and substantive elements of judgments, including the dispositive and reasoning, as well as the proper assessment and presentation of evidence.

Particular emphasis was placed on decisions concerning detention on remand, where the quality and adequacy of judicial reasoning are of particular importance. Participants discussed the consequences of insufficient reasoning, including the possibility that a decision may be quashed or returned for reconsideration by a higher-level court. 

The training also addressed challenges arising when judicial proceedings rely on external expertise, particularly where expert evidence is incomplete or of insufficient quality. Participants considered how such evidence should be assessed and reflected in the reasoning of a judgment, while taking into account the need for decisions to be understandable and accessible to their intended readers.

Through practical exercises, participants applied the IRAC methodology to judicial case scenarios and developed structured approaches to reasoning. Specific attention was given to drafting a concise and precise dispositive, clearly setting out the essential elements of the criminal offence, and accurately citing the applicable legal provisions, including the specific legal provision found to have been violated.

The discussions further highlighted the importance of clear and concise judicial writing, including the use of shorter paragraphs and a logical structure, as means of enhancing the clarity, accessibility and overall quality of judicial decisions.

The activity contributes to strengthening the capacity of judges and prosecutors to apply European standards on the right to a fair trial in their daily judicial practice, while promoting more consistent, informed and well-reasoned judicial decision-making. The next training for serving judges and prosecutors will be organised on 1 October, with thematic focus on the practice of the European Court of Human Rights in administrative disputes cases.