¹ See also Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct of 2002, value 4 identifying the judges as a subject of constant public scrutiny; references to public confidence and the role of judges appear also in several national codes of conduct, e.g. General Council of the Judiciary (Spain). Principles of Judicial Ethics, 16 December 2016; United States Courts. Code of Conduct for United States Judges, http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges.Google Scholar

² E.g. Report of CEPEJ on European Judicial Systems (2016). https://www.uihj.com/en/publication-of-the-2016-report-of-cepej-on-european-judicial-systems_2165915.html.Google Scholar

³ European Commission. Effective justice. https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/effective-justice_en.Google Scholar

⁴ E.g. Committee for the Evaluation of the Modernisation of the Dutch Judiciary (2006). Judiciary is Quality. https://www.rechtspraak.nl/SiteCollectionDocuments/Judiciary-is-quality.pdf.Google Scholar

⁵ E.g. United States Courts. Enhancing Public Understanding, Trust, and Confidence. http://www.uscourts.gov/statistics-reports/issue-7-enhancing-public-understanding-trust-and-confidence. Or Public Service and Trust Commission (2008). Strategic Plan for the Judicial Branch. https://www.jud.ct.gov/Committees/pst/StrategicPlan.pdf.Google Scholar

⁶ Kosař, David, Beyond Judicial Councils: Forms, Rationales and Impact of Judicial Self-Government in Europe in this issue.Google Scholar

⁷ For a definition of a judicial council, see Kosař, id. Google Scholar

⁸ Resolution of the General Assembly of the European Network of Councils for the judiciary (2008), Budapest, 21-23 May, 2008; The European Network of Councils for the Judiciary (ENCJ): Council for the Judiciary Report 2010/2011. ENJC Project Team; Recommendation No. R (94) 12, Committee of Ministers.Google Scholar

⁹ Larkins, Christopher M., Judicial Independence and Democratization: A Theoretical and Conceptual Analysis, 44 ASCL 605 (1996); Peter H. Russell and David M. O'Brien, Judicial Independence in the Age of Democracy (2001).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Recommendation CM/Rec (2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities, Committee of Ministers, 17 November 2010, para. 46.Google Scholar

¹¹ Argument raised e.g. by Nuno Garoupa & Tom Ginsburg, Guarding the Guardians: Judicial Councils and Judicial Independence, 57 Am. J. of Comp. Law 103 (2009).Google Scholar

¹² For some exemption see e.g. US or common law scholarship: Sara C. Benesh, Understanding Public Confidence in American Courts, The Journal of Politics 697 (2006). Sarah M. R. Cravens, Promoting Public Confidence in the Regulation of Judicial Conduct: A Survey of Recent Developments and Practices in Four Common Law Countries, 42 McGeorge Law Review 177-212 (2011).Google Scholar

¹³ Cravens, supra note 12; Gregory A. Caldeira, Neither the Purse Nor the Sword: Dynamics of Public Confidence in the Supreme Court, 80 The American Political Science Review 1209–1226 (1986), http://www.jstor.org/stable/1960864; Benesh Sara C., supra note 12.Google Scholar

¹⁴ France, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Schwartz, Herman, The Struggle for Constitutional Justice in Post-Communist Europe (2004).Google Scholar

¹⁶ Shortly after the WW2, constitutional courts were introduced in Austria, Germany, Italy, Greece, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, and France. Similar development followed after 1989 in post-communist countries.Google Scholar

¹⁷ ODIHR. Judicial Independence in Eastern Europe, South Caucasus and Central Asia. Challenges, Reforms, and Way Forward. Meeting Report, 23-25 June 2010, https://www.osce.org/odihr/71178?download=true.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Some authors however pointed out the risk of establishing judicial councils in countries which did not purify and screen the post-communist judiciaries. David Kosař, Perils of Judicial Self-Government in Transitional Societies (2016).Google Scholar

¹⁹ THE BANGALORE PRINCIPLES, 2002, supra note 1, at 11.Google Scholar

²⁰ Commentary on Bangalore Principles https://rm.coe.int/168066d6b9.Google Scholar

²¹ Id. Google Scholar

²² OSCE and Max Planck Minerva Research Group on Judicial Independence. Kyiv Recommendations on Judicial Independence in Eastern Europe, South Caucasus and Central Asia, https://www.osce.org/odihr/KyivRec?download=true.Google Scholar

²³ Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers, Recommendation No. R (94) 12 (1994) http://www.barobirlik.org.tr/dosyalar/duyurular/hsykkanunteklifi/recR(94)12e.pdf.Google Scholar

²⁴ Council of Europe Portal, https://www.coe.int/en/web/human-rights-rule-of-law/-/council-of-europe-launches-action-plan-on-strengthening-judicial-independence-and-impartiality and Council of Europe, Plan of Action on Strengthening Judicial Independence and Impartiality CM(2016)36 https://rm.coe.int/1680700125.Google Scholar

²⁵ Venice Commission. Judicial Appointments. Discussion paper, 14 March 2007, http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-JD(2007)001-e.Google Scholar

²⁶ European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/justice-and-fundamental-rights/effective-justice/improving-effectiveness-national-justice-systems_en.Google Scholar

²⁷ European Network of Councils for the Judiciary. Public Confidence and the Image of Justice. Report 2017-2018. https://pgwrk-websitemedia.s3.eu-west-l.amazonaws.com/production/pwk-web-encj2017-p/Reports/ENCJ_Report_Public_Confidence_2017_2018%20adopted_%20GA_1_June_2018.pdf.Google Scholar

²⁸ Philip M. Langbroek, Reform of the Judiciary in the Netherlands. Some Lessons after the First 8 Years. World Bank Group, http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTECA/Resources/ReformJudiciaryNetherlands.pdf.Google Scholar

²⁹ Id. Google Scholar

³⁰ Philip M. Langbroek, Organization Development of the Dutch Judiciary, between Accountability and Judicial Independence. IJCA:2 (April 2010).Google Scholar

³¹ Le Conseil de la Justice, http://www.hrj.be/fr/content/historique.Google Scholar

³² Conseil Superieur de la Magistrature, http://www.conseil-superieur-magistrature.fr/le-csm/histoire-etpatrimoine.Google Scholar

³³ La tutela dell'onore professionale e della dignità personale dei magistrati. L'esigenza di garantire il rispetto della funzione giudiziaria. Resolution of the CSM,15 December 1999; Renato Balduzzi, Inauguration of the Judicial Year 2015. 24 January 2015, https://www.csm.it/web/rbalduzzi/bacheca-del-consigliere/-/blogs/inaugurazione-dell-anno-giudiziario-2015; Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura, https://www.csm.it/web/csm-internet/assistenza-al-cittadino.Google Scholar

³⁴ It is worth noting that focus on public confidence appears only in the new 2017 proposal. Department of Justice and Equality, Judicial Council Bill 2017 http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Judicial_Council_Bill_2017_Explanatory_and_Financial_Memorandum.pdf/Files/Judicial_Council_Bill_2017_Explanatory_and_Financial_Memorandum.pdf Google Scholar

³⁵ Id. Google Scholar

³⁶ IBAHRI. Still under threat: The independence of the judiciary and the rule of law in Hungary, 2015. https://www.premier.gov.pl/files/files/white_paper_en_full.pdf.Google Scholar

³⁸ Id. Google Scholar

³⁹ Le Conseil de la Justice, http://www.hrj.be/fr/content/communique-de-presse-le-conseil-superieur-de-la-justice-10-ans-apres-la-marche-blanche. The Belgian High Council of Justice. Presentation, http://www.hrj.be/sites/default/files/press_publications/o0026b.pdf.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ See supra note 4.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Sztompka, Plotr, Trust: A Sociological Theory 11–15 (2000).Google Scholar

⁴² Luhmann, Niklas, Familiarity, Confidence, Trust: Problems and Alternatives, in Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations 94-107 (Diego Gambetta ed., 1988).Google Scholar

⁴³ E.g., normally, we are confident that when we leave our homes in the morning and go to work, there will not be a commando of snipers trying to shoot us down. Although it is possible, we bracket this option because it is highly improbable, and also because otherwise we would have to live in a state of permanent uncertainty.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Sztompka, supra note 41, at 25.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Id. at 25.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ E.g., Jeffery J Mondak & Shannon Smithey Smithey, The Dynamics of Public Support for the Supreme Court, 59 The Journal of Politics 1114–1142 (1997).Google Scholar

⁴⁷ E.g., Caldeira, supra note 13.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ E.g., Bühlmann, Marc & Kunz, Ruth, Confidence in the Judiciary: Comparing the Independence and Legitimacy of Judicial Systems, 34 West European Politics 318 (2011).Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Lewicki, Roy J., McAllister, Daniel J. & Bies, Robert J., Trust and Distrust: New Relationships and Realities, 23 Academy of Management Review 439 (1998).Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Citrin, Jack & Muste, Christopher, Trust in Government, in Measures of Political Attitudes 465-532 (Robinson, John, Shaver, Phillip R. & Wrightsman, Lawrence S. eds, 1999).Google Scholar

⁵¹ Dougherty, George W., Lindquist, Stefanie A. & Bradbury, Mark D., Evaluating Performance in State Judicial Institutions: Trust and Confidence in the Georgia Judiciary, 38 State and Local Government Review 176 (2006).Google Scholar

⁵² Cook, Timothy E. & Gronke, Paul, The Skeptical American: Revisiting the Meanings of Trust in Government and Confidence in Institutions, 67 The Journal of Politics 785 (2005).Google Scholar

⁵³ Gibson, James L., Caldeira, Gregory A. & Spence, Lester Kenyatta, Measuring Attitudes toward the United States Supreme Court, 47 American Journal Of Political Science 364 (2003).Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Sztompka, supra note 41, at 41-46.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Uslaner, Eric M., The Moral Foundations of Trust (2002).Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Oskarsson, Sven, Torsten Svensson & PerOla Oberg, Power, Trust, and Institutional Constraints: Individual Level Evidence, 21 Rationality And Society 173 (2009).Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Sztompka, supra note 41, at 69-101.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Newton, Kenneth & Norris, Pippa, Confidence in Public Institutions: Faith, Culture or Performance?, in Disaffected Democracies: What's Troubling the Trilateral Countries? 56 (Pharr, Susan J. & Putnam, Robert D. eds., 2000).Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Mishler, William & Rose, Richard, What Are the Origins of Political Trust? Testing Institutional and Cultural Theories in Post-communist Societies, 34 Comparative Political Studies 30–62 (2001).Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Newton & Norris, supra note 58, at 58.Google Scholar

⁶¹ E.g., Bühlmann & Kunz supra note 48, at 332. Newton & Norris, supra note 58, at 9. William Mishler & Richard Rose, Trust, Distrust and Skepticism: Popular Evaluations of Civil and Political Institutions in Post-Communist Societies, 59 The Journal of Politics 444 (1997). Ola Listhaug, Confidence in Institutions: Findings from the Norwegian Values, 27 Acta Sociologica 121 (1984). James W. Stoutenborough & Donald P. Haider-Markel, Public Confidence in the U.S. Supreme Court: A New Look at the Impact of Court Decisions, 45 The Social Science Journal 38 (2008). Ryan Salzman & Adam Ramsey, Judging the Judiciary: Understanding Public Confidence in Latin American Courts, 55 Latin American Politics 88 (2013).Google Scholar

⁶² E.g., Stoutenborough & Haider-Markel, , supra note 61. Benesh, supra note 12. James P. Wenzel, Shaun Bowler & David J. Lanoue, The Sources Of Public Confidence In State Courts: Experience and Institutions, 31 American Politics Research 200 (2003).Google Scholar

⁶³ E.g., Lühiste, Kadri, Explaining Trust in Political Institutions: Some Illustrations from the Baltic States, 39 Communist and Post-Communist Studies 493 (2006).Google Scholar

⁶⁴ E.g., Bühlmann & Kunz supra note 48, at 332. Mishler & Rose, supra note 61, at 445.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ E.g., Lühiste, , supra note 63. Bühlmann & Kunz, supra note 48, at 332. Newton & Norris, supra note 58, at 9. Mishler & Rose, supra note 61, at 445. Christine A. Kelleher & Jennifer Wolak, Explaining Public Confidence in the Branches of State Government, 60 Political Research Quarterly 717 (2007).Google Scholar

⁶⁶ E.g., Stoutenborough & Haider-Markel, , supra note 61.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ E.g., Mishler & Rose, supra note 61, at 445. Newton & Norris, supra note 58, at 9. Kelleher & Wolak, supra note 65, at 717. Listhaug, supra note 61.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ E.g., Stoutenborough & Haider-Markel, , supra note 61. Lühiste, supra note 63, at 486.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Bühlmann & Kunz supra note 48, at 332.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ E.g., Lühiste, , supra note 63, at 491. Kelleher & Wolak, supra note 65. Dougherty, Lindquist & Bradbury, supra note 50. David B. Rottman & Alan Tomkins, Public Trust and Confidence in the Courts: What Public Opinion Surveys Mean to Judges, 36 Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association 24–31 (1999).Google Scholar

⁷¹ Wenzel, Bowler & Lanoue, supra note 62, at 202.Google Scholar

⁷² E.g., Benesh, supra note 12, at 704. Wenzel, Bowler & Lanoue, supra note 62, at 204. Thomas E. Fossati & James W. Meeker, Evaluations of Institutional Legitimacy and Court System Fairness: A study of gender differences, 25 Journal of Criminal Justice 152 (1997).Google Scholar

⁷³ E.g., Wenzel, Bowler & Lanoue, supra note 62, at 206.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Salzman & Ramsey, supra note 61, at 89.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ E.g., Wenzel, Bowler & Lanoue, supra note 62, at 202. Benesh, supra note 12, at 704. James L. Gibson, Gregory A. Caldeira & Vanessa A. Baird, On the Legitimacy of National High Courts, 92 American Political Science Review 350 (1998).Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Salzman & Ramsey, supra note 61, at 88-89.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ E.g., Kelleher & Wolak, supra note 65. Yingyos Leechaianan, Seksan Khruakham & Larry T. Hoover, Public Confidence in Thailand's Legal Authorities, 14 International Journal of Police Science & Management 246–263 (2012).Google Scholar

⁷⁸ E.g., Listhaug, supra note 61.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ E.g., Stoutenborough & Haider-Markel, , supra note 61. Gregory A. Caldeira & James L. Gibson, The Etiology of Public Support for the Supreme Court, 36 American Journal of Political Science 658 (1992).Google Scholar

⁸⁰ E.g., Caldeira & Gibson, supra note 79.Google Scholar

⁸¹ E.g., Salzman & Ramsey, supra note 61, at 87.Google Scholar

⁸² E.g., Salzman & Ramsey, supra note 61.Google Scholar

⁸³ E.g., Bühlmann & Kunz supra note 48, at 332. Lühiste, supra note 63, at 491.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ E.g., Lühiste, , supra note 63. Mishler & Rose, supra note 61, at 442.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Mishler & Rose, supra note 61, at 441.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ E.g., Salzman & Ramsey, supra note 61, at 87. Kelleher & Wolak, supra note 67, at 718. Lühiste, supra note 63. Mishler & Rose, supra note 61, at 48. Bianca Clausen, Aart Kraay & Zsolt Nyiri, Corruption and Confidence in Public Institutions: Evidence from a Global Survey, 25 World Bank Economic Review 232 (2011).Google Scholar

⁸⁷ E.g., Fossati & Meeker, supra note 72. Tom R. Tyler, Public Trust and Confidence in Legal Authorities: What Do Majority and Minority Group Members Want from the Law and Legal Institutions?, 19 Behavioral Sciences and the LAW 233 (2001).Google Scholar

⁸⁸ E.g., Stoutenborough & Haider-Markel, supra note 61, at 41. Grosskopf, Anke & Mondak, Jeffery J., Do Attitudes Toward Specific Supreme Court Decisions Matter? The Impact of Webster and Texas v. Johnson on Public Confidence in the Supreme Court, 51 Political Research Quarterly 651–652 (2016).Google Scholar

⁸⁹ E.g., Lühiste, , supra note 63. Newton & Norris, supra note 60, at 63. Kenneth Newton, Trust, Social Capital, Civil Society, and Democracy, 22 International Political Science Review 211 (2001).Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Mishler & Rose, supra note 59, at 46.Google Scholar

⁹¹ E.g., Wenzel, Bowler & Lanoue, supra note 62, at 202. Salzman & Ramsey, supra note 61, at 87. Bühlmann & Kunz, supra note 48, at 332. Benesh, supra note 12, at 704. Stoutenborough & Haider-Markel, supra note 61, at 41. Magali Rheault & Bob Tortora, Confidence in Institutions: Africans Speak on the Meaning of Being Well Governed, 32 Harvard International Review 74 (2011).Google Scholar

⁹² Markova, Ivana, Trust and Democratic Transition in Post-Communist Europe 1–23 (2004).Google Scholar

⁹³ Sztompka, supra note 41, at 152-153.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Sapsford, Roger & Abbott, Pamela, Trust, Confidence and Social Environment in Post-Communist Societies, 39 Communist and Post-Communist Studies 59–71 (2006).Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Id. at 160.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Kühn, Zdenek, The Judiciary in Central and Eastern Europe: Mechanical Jurisprudence in Transformation? 53 (2011).Google Scholar

⁹⁷ http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/Chart/index.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ E.g., Bühlmann & Kunz supra note 48, at 332. Salzman & Ramsey, supra note 61.Google Scholar

⁹⁹ E.g., Stoutenborough & Haider-Markel, , supra note 61, at 41.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ E.g., Kelleher & Wolak, supra note 65, at 715.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ E.g., Grimmelikhuijsen, Stephan & Klijn, Albert, The Effects of Judicial Transparency on Public Trust: Evidence From a Field Experiment, 93 Public Administration 1006–1007 (2015).Google Scholar

¹⁰² E.g., Kelleher & Wolak, supra note 65, at 715.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ E.g., Wenzel, Bowler & Lanoue, supra note 62, at 205. Anthony J. Nownes & Colin Glennon, An Experimental Investigation of How Judicial Elections Affect Public Faith in the Judicial System, 41 Law & Social Inquiry 56 (2016).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ E.g., Benesh, supra note 12, at 704.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ E.g., Bühlmann & Kunz supra note 48, at 328.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ E.g., Caldeira, supra note 13, at 1223.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ E.g., Twenge, Jean M., Campbell, W. Keith & Carter, Nathan T., Declines in Trust in Others and Confidence in Institutions Among American Adults and Late Adolescents, 1972-2012, 25 Psychological Science 1921 (2014).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ E.g., Kelleher & Wolak, supra note 65. Caldeira, supra note 13, at 1219.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ E.g., Benesh, supra note 12, at 704.Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ E.g., Caldeira, supra note 13, at 1219. Kelleher & Wolak, supra note 67.Google Scholar

¹¹¹ E.g., Caldeira, supra note 13, at 1219.Google Scholar

¹¹² France, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey.Google Scholar

¹¹³ In the 2013 Eurobarometer survey, a majority of respondents - 57% - claimed to have no personal experience of any type of courtroom within the last ten years, and no close relative who has had this kind of experience. Source: European Commission, Justice in the EU. Flash Eurobarometer 385 (2013), http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/flash/fl_385_en.pdf2013 (last visited Oct. 12, 2018).Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ Steven Van de Walle & Geert Bouckaert, Public Service Performance and Trust in Government: The Problem of Causality, 26 InternationalJournal of Public Administration 908–909 (2003).Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ Commission, European, supra note 113, at 6.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ Commission, European, supra note 113, at 16.Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ Matthew 13:12.Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ O'Brien, Patrick, Never let a Crisis go to Waste: Politics, Personality and Judicial Self-Government in Ireland, in this issue.Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ Kosař, , supra note 18.Google Scholar

¹²⁰ Guţan, Bianca Seiejan, Romania: Perils of a “Perfect Euro-Model” of Judicial Council, in this issue.Google Scholar

¹²¹ Avbelj, Matej, Contextual Analysis of Judicial Governance in Slovenia, in this issue.Google Scholar

¹²² Avbelj, supra note 121.Google Scholar

¹²³ Spáč, Samuel, Katarína Śipulová & Marína Urbániková’ Capturing the Judiciary from Inside: The Story of Judicial Self-Governance in Slovakia, in this issue.Google Scholar

¹²⁴ Commission, European, supra note 113, at 13.Google Scholar

¹²⁵ Spáč, , Śipulová & Urbániková, supra note 123.Google Scholar

¹²⁶ Avbelj, supra note 121.Google Scholar

¹²⁷ Pérez, Aida Torres, Judicial Self-government and Judicial Independence: The Political Capture of the Judicial Council in Spain, in this issue.Google Scholar

¹²⁸ Çalı, Başak & Durmuş, Betül, Judicial Self-Government as Experimental Constitutional Politics: The Case of Turkey, in this issue.Google Scholar

¹²⁹ Vauchez, Antoine, The Strange Non-Death of Statism: Tracing The Ever Protracted Rise of Self-Government in France, in this issue.Google Scholar

¹³⁰ Benvenuti, Simone & Paris, Davide, Judicial Self-Government in Italy: Merits, Limits and the Reality of an Export Model, in this issue.Google Scholar

¹³¹ Śledzińska-Simon, Anna, The Rise and Fall of Judicial Self-Government in Poland: On Judicial Reform Reversing Democratic Transition in this issueGoogle Scholar

¹³² O'Brien, supra note 118.Google Scholar

¹³³ Mak, Elaine, Judicial Self-Government in the Netherlands: Demarcating Autonomy, in this issue.Google Scholar

¹³⁴ Mak, supra note 133.Google Scholar

¹³⁵ Source: Eurobarometer, own calculation. Legend: The shares of trusting citizens are computed as averages of respondents claiming to tend to trust in the respective institutions between October 2004 (the first Eurobarometer round when the data were collected in both the old and new EU member states), and November 2017. In all the countries under examination, judicial councils were established before 2004, with the only exception being Latvia which established its judicial council in 2010 (nevertheless, Latvia was included into the group of countries with a judicial council). Countries without a judicial council: Austria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, Greece, Luxembourg, United Kingdom.Google Scholar

¹³⁶ Source: Eurobarometer. For Legend, see supra note 135. New EU member states: Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia. The same timeframe (2004-2017) was applied to Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia, even though they became members of the EU in 2007 and 2013, respectively (however, the data is available since 2004). Old EU member states: Austria, Finland, Germany, Greece, Luxembourg, United Kingdom, Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden.Google Scholar

¹³⁷ After all, as the Thomas theorem says, “If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences”. Thus, citizens act according to their level of confidence in the judiciary, even though their perception does not necessarily need to be objective. William Issac Thomas & Dorothy Swaine Thomas, The Child in America: Behavior Problems and Programs 571–572 (1928).Google Scholar