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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
2/146
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
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:
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.
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
6/146
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
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.
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
8/146
Te World Justice Project
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.
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
10/146
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
12/146
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
14/146
8
Te World Justice Project
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.
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
15/146
9
WJP Rule of Law Index 2010
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
16/146
10
Te World Justice Project
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.
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
17/146
11
WJP Rule of Law Index 2010
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.
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
18/146
12
Te World Justice Project
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.
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
19/146
13
WJP Rule of Law Index 2010
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;
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
20/146
14
Te World Justice Project
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
21/146
15
WJP Rule of Law Index 2010
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.
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
22/146
16
Te World Justice Project
J
f
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
24/146
18
Te World Justice Project
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.
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
25/146
19
WJP Rule of Law Index 2010
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
26/146
20
Te World Justice Project
Theruleoflawaroundthewo
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
27/146
21
WJP Rule of Law Index 2010
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
28/146
22
Te World Justice Project
Theruleoflawaroundthewo
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.
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
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.
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
31/146
Accountable Government
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
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
not subject to
unreasonable
delays
8.7 Civil justice is
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
9.6 Due process of law
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
32/146
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
Income
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.
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
No action Other
Commercial arbitration procedure Traditional or local leader Direct renegotiation
Region
Length of time to solve the conflictor get money back (court only)
1. WJP Rule of Law Index
26
3%
31%
69%
No,
82%
Yes,
18%
4% Dont know
26% NeverResolved
26% Morethan 3 years
20% Between 1and 3 years
20% Between 1month and 1 year
4% Less than 1month
61%
28%
2%
8%
28%
15%
Score Global Ranking Regional Ranking Income Group Ranking
Factor 1: Limited Government Powers 0.32 33/35 7/7 7/7
Factor 2: Absence of Corruption 0.48 20/35 3/7 4/7
Factor 3: Clear, Publicized, and Stable Laws 0.39 31/35 6/7 6/7
Factor 4: Order and Security 0.51 25/35 2/7 5/7
Factor 5: Fundamental Rights 0.58 21/35 3/7 5/7
Factor 6: Open Government 0.29 29/35 7/7 6/7
Factor 7: Regulatory Enforcement 0.42 28/35 5/7 5/7
Factor 8: Access to Civil Justice 0.55 20/35 3/7 4/7
Factor 9: Effective Criminal Justice 0.43 28/35 3/7 6/7
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
was conducted by a leading local company during September 2009.
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
33/146
Accountable Government
Security and Fundamental Rights
Open Government and
Regulatory Enforcement
Access to Justice
Key
3. Scores for all WJP Rule of Law Indexsub-factors2
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
1.3 Government powers
limited by judiciary
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
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
not subject to
unreasonable
delays
8.7 Civil justice is
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
9.6 Due process of law
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.
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
34/146
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
HighIncome
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.
28
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
Region
Length of time to solve the conflictor get money back (court only)
16% 10% Dont know
24% NeverResolved
5% More than3 years
15% Between 1and 3 years
39% Between 1month and 1 year
7% Less than 1month
5%9%
27%
15%
28%
Yes,
10%
No,
90%
12%
88%
63%
6%
30%
1%
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 Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane. The poll was designed by the World Justice Project, and field-work
was conducted by a leading local company during September 2009.
Score Global Ranking Regional Ranking Income Group Ranking
Factor 1: Limited Government Powers 0.83 3/35 1/7 3/11
Factor 2: Absence of Corruption 0.88 6/35 2/7 6/11
Factor 3: Clear, Publicized, and Stable Laws 0.76 5/35 2/7 5/11
Factor 4: Order and Security 0.89 6/35 3/7 6/11
Factor 5: Fundamental Rights 0.82 6/35 1/7 6/11
Factor 6: Open Government 0.64 7/35 2/7 7/11
Factor 7: Regulatory Enforcement 0.80 5/35 2/7 5/11
Factor 8: Access to Civil Justice 0.73 6/35 3/7 6/11
Factor 9: Effective Criminal Justice 0.76 8/35 3/7 8/11
89% Urban
46% in three
largest cities
22 Mil. (2008)
East Asia &Pacific
Australia Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane1
Court lawsuit
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
35/146
Accountable Government
Security and Fundamental Rights
Open Government and
Regulatory Enforcement
Access to Justice
Key
3. Scores for all WJP Rule of Law Indexsub-factors2
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
1.3 Government powers
limited by judiciary
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
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
not subject to
unreasonable
delays
8.7 Civil justice is
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
9.6 Due process of law
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.
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
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
36/146
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
HighIncome
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.
30
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
Western Europe& North AmericaRegion
Length of time to solve the conflictor get money back (court only)
10% Dont know
22% NeverResolved
11% Morethan 3 years
24% Between 1and 3 years
30% Between 1month and 1 year
3% Less than 1month
3%
3%
20%
23%
1%
51%
No,
85%
Yes,
15%
11%
89%49%12%
35%
4%
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 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.
Score Global Ranking Regional Ranking Income Group Ranking
Factor 1: Limited Government Powers 0.82 4/35 3/7 4/11
Factor 2: Absence of Corruption 0.92 3/35 3/7 3/11
Factor 3: Clear, Publicized, and Stable Laws 0.74 6/35 4/7 6/11
Factor 4: Order and Security 0.91 3/35 1/7 3/11
Factor 5: Fundamental Rights 0.92 1/35 1/7 1/11
Factor 6: Open Government 0.56 11/35 6/7 9/11
Factor 7: Regulatory Enforcement 0.82 3/35 3/7 3/11
Factor 8: Access to Civil Justice 0.81 4/35 3/7 4/11
Factor 9: Effective Criminal Justice 0.90 1/35 1/7 1/11
67% Urban
35% in three
largest cities
8 Mil. (2008)
Austria Wien, Graz, Linz1
Court lawsuit
8/8/2019 WJP Rule of Law Index 2010_0
37/146
Accountable Government
Security and Fundamental Rights
Open Government and
Regulatory Enforcement
Access to Justice
Key
3. Scores for all WJP Rule of Law Indexsub-factors2
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
1.3 Government powers
limited by judiciary
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
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
not subject to
unreasonable
delays
8.7 Civil justice is
effectively enforced8.8 ADRs are
accessible,
impartial, and
effective
9.1 Criminal
investigation system