Activities of the Council for Administration of Courts in 2025

Karin Leichter-Tammisto
Legal Adviser to the Chief Justice at the Supreme Court of Estonia

Composition and sessions

The Council for Administration of Courts (CAC) is an advisory body convened to manage the judicial system and administers the courts of first and second instance in cooperation with the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs. According to the Courts Act (CA), the CAC has the competence to grant approvals and provide positions, as well as to give opinions on matters concerning courts and judges. In addition, the CAC prepares guidelines and recommendations that help ensure the proper administration of justice and a uniform approach by courts in situations not regulated by law.

In 2025, the members of the CAC were Merit Helm from the Harju District Court, Kristjan Siigur (who was elected as a member of the CAC as an administrative judge, but is currently the Chair of the Tallinn Circuit Court), Judge of the Tallinn Circuit Court Virgo Saarmets, Judge of the Tartu Circuit Court Tanel Saar and Supreme Court Justice Ivo Pilving; the alternates were Anu Uritam from the Harju District Court, Sten Lind from the Tallinn Circuit Court and Juhan Sarv from the Supreme Court. The other members of the CAC are the Prosecutor General, who was Andres Parmas at the beginning of the year and Astrid Asi from 2 April 2025, the Chair of the Estonian Bar Association Imbi Jürgen (until May 2025, the Bar Association was represented by sworn advocate Toomas Vaher), Chancellor of Justice Ülle Madise (who was represented by Senior Adviser Marju Agarmaa), the Chairman of the Constitutional Committee at the Riigikogu Ando Kiviberg, the Chair of the Legal Affairs Committee Madis Timpson, and as an alternate, member of the Constitutional Committee Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart. The work of the Council was chaired by Villu Kõve, Chief Justice of Supreme Court. The Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs or a representative appointed by them and the chairs and directors of courts participated in the discussions at the CAC sessions as well.

According to its Rules of Procedure, the CAC convenes in regular session four times a year, and may also meet in extraordinary sessions as needed. In 2025, four regular sessions and one extraordinary session were held.[1] All minutes of the CAC sessions are available on the website of the courts.

Amending the model of court administration

Discussions on the necessity and feasibility of changing the existing model of court administration started in 2023.[2] By order of 19 October 2023, the Chief Justice of Supreme Court formed a working group whose task was to develop proposals on how to separate the administration of the courts from the executive branch and to give the corresponding competence to the judicial system. Proposals in this regard were first formulated as a legislative intent[3], then as a draft amendment to the Courts Act and other related acts[4].

During the 2024 sessions of the CAC, feedback on the draft was discussed and positions were taken on a number of key issues, such as the composition of the new court administrative body (Council for Administration and Development of Courts (CADC) according to the initial draft). Thus, at the session of the CAC on 19 September 2024, a consensus was reached that the composition of the CADC should include the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, five judgeselected from different court instances, the Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs or their representative, two members of the Riigikogu, a representative of the Bar Association and the Chancellor of Justice.[5] The session also marked a turning point in the future development of the draft amendment to the model of court administration. It was known at the time that the judiciary would face major budget cuts and in these circumstances the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs gave the CAC a choice of three options on how to proceed with the draft.[6] In addition to changing the model of court administration, the CAC supported the possibility that the draft would decouple the courts of first and second instance from the executive branch and reorganise them as a constitutional institution.[7]

At its meeting in December 2024, the CAC noted that it was still unclear how many budgetary resources would be allocated to the court system for the implementation of the model of court administration, how the different competences would be distributed between the executive branch and the new court administration body, and that there was no concrete implementation plan for the draft.[8]

On 20 December 2024, an amended draft amendment to the model of court administration was sent to the courts for their opinion[9]. As a result of the feedback received and the suggestions made by the CAC, the composition of the CADC was changed in the draft. The draft also sought to give the CADC the power to determine the areas in which the courts operate, to decide on the number and distribution of judges in the district, administrative and circuit courts, and to establish the rules of procedure of the court offices. The amendments also provided for a new budgetary arrangement, according to which the courts of first and second instance would, like the Supreme Court, independently defend their budgets in the Finance Committee of the Riigikogu.

In 2025, the first session of the CAC focused mainly on feedback on the draft model of court administration.[10] The date of entry into force of the Act – 1 May 2025 – was called into question, as it was considered to be too hasty. In the opinion of the members of the CAC, this pace did not allow for parliamentary debate and, given the current procedure for the election of members of the self-governing bodies of the judiciary, it was not considered realistic to elect the members of the CADC at the ordinary plenary session of judges. It was stressed that the draft should be accompanied by a practical implementation plan with specific timeframes. It was also pointed out that the new budgetary process was not well thought-out. Control of the court information system was considered important: the transfer of the administration of the courts should be accompanied by the administration of information systems, with the necessary budgetary resources for their development.

The draft amendment to the model of court administration 632 SE[11] submitted to the Riigikogu in April 2025 provided for the entry into force of the amendments in stages. According to the explanatory memorandum[12], the provisions allowing the election of the members of CADC by the plenary session of the judges were to enter into force first, on 1 June 2025. Thereafter, on 1 October 2025, the changes related to the start of work of CADC were to follow. The entry into force of the latest amendments was planned for 1 January 2026, when the court administration functions that were previously the responsibility of the executive branch were to be transferred to a new court administration body. Although by the time of the 31 May 2025 CAC meeting, the CAC members had received information that the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Digital Affairs had proposed a new schedule for the entry into force of the Act, which postponed the dates, it was still felt that the draft had been prepared too quickly, that there were several issues that still needed to be thought through, and that it should not be adopted in the Riigikogu in its current form.[13] The latter was also supported by the fact that the Riigikogu had received an opinion from the University of Tartu stating that the changes to the model of court administration proposed in the draft may be unconstitutional.

As the second reading of the draft 632 SE was suspended in the Riigikogu, several fundamental issues of changing the model of court administration were once again on the table in September:

1. CADC’s competence to determine the areas in which courts are to operate, the location of courthouses and the total number of judges;
2. the budgetary process and the possible weakening of the budgetary position of the courts if there is no representative of the executive branch to defend the interests of the courts;
3. Composition of the CADC – whether the members of the Riigikogu should be members of the CADC and whether this is in line with international recommendations; to what extent is the solution of only five of the eleven members of the CADC provided for in the draft being judges chosen by judges themselves justified; whether the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court should be a member and the head of the CADC.

In essence, these questions brought us back to the decisions taken at the September 2024 session on the composition of the CADC and the treatment of the courts of first and second instance as a constitutional institution. As these issues were raised in the Constitutional Committee of the Riigikogu immediately before the session of the CAC, the CAC did not take a position on them without a thorough analysis. There was no consensus among the members of the CAC on whether the number of judges should be stipulated in the law. There was also disagreement on whether members of the Riigikogu should be members of the CADC‑. Among the members of the CAC, there were those who considered it important that members of parliament be aware of the problems of the court system and be in the same information field, as well as those who considered their participation in the work of the CADC as a decision-making body to be in conflict with the incompatibility rule applying to members of the Riigikogu.

Before the session of 12 December 2025, a draft court organisation had been finalised[14], reforming the whole court system (merger of courts, specialisation of judges, formation of a court presidium, etc.) and including provisions to modify the model of court administration. The Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs prepared proposals for the CAC based on the feedback received on the draft 632 SE and other amendments to the court organisation[15], on the basis of which there were plans to prepare a new draft once again. In the proposals, the name of the CADC was replaced by the Council of the Courts and it was proposed that its composition would include the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, six elected judges and four non-judges – representatives of the Chancellor of Justice, the Bar Association, the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs and the Riigikogu. As an alternative, the possibility was proposed for discussion that instead of a representative of the Riigikogu, the Council could include an additional representative of the Bar Association or the Prosecutor’s Office. According to the materials sent to the CAC, there were plans to stipulate the maximum number of judges and a list of court cities in the Courts Act. A possible budgetary procedure was also presented, in which the courts of first and second instance would form a group of courts as a constitutional institution. The members of the CAC expressed their views on the amendments, with a common position only on the merger of courts (see more under the sub-heading “Court reform”).[16]

The new draft amendment to the court organisation[17] was sent for approval on 16 January 2026. The differences from the earlier version of the draft were, among other things, that the Court Administration Service to be formed together with the Council of Courts would be part of the Tartu Circuit Court, and in the new draft, one member of the Riigikogu in the Council was replaced by the Chancellor of the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs. Further changes have been made to the draft after feedback has been received, and discussions on the amendment and implementation of the model of court administration will certainly continue in the 2026 session of the CAC.

Court reform

As noted, at the end of 2025, the changes to the model of court administration were drafted, which envisages an even more far-reaching change to the court system – in other words, court reform. In fact, in both 2024 and 2025, it was repeatedly discussed whether the merger of courts, the change of the current governance model and administration, and other issues of importance for the judiciary should be addressed as a whole in a single draft, or whether the changes to the model of administration should be finalised, as a great deal of work had already been done in their preparation. The first proposals for court reform were presented to the CAC for discussion on 6 December 2024, where the implementation of changes in various stages was supported. It was felt that a number of issues needed further analysis.

At the meeting of 14 March 2025, the draft legislative intent on the Courts Act and other Acts[18] was submitted to the CAC for an opinion on the following topics:

• merging courts of the same type;
• setting up a system of alternate judges;
• the formation of the court presidium and the extension of the powers of a chair of the court;
• the judge’s remuneration, compensation and removal from office;
• the length of the period of disciplinary liability of the judge;
• security clearance of a candidate judge;
• abolition of the institution of lay judge.

The most controversial issue in the discussion group was the merger of courts of the same type to form one district court, one administrative court and one circuit court. The constitutionality of the system of alternate judges was questioned, as well as the grounds for removing a judge from office.[19]

On 25 April 2025, the legislative intent of the Court Reform was submitted to the courts for their opinion[20]. A financial analysis of this part of the structural changes to the courts was commissioned from AS PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisors[21]. The May meeting of the CAC focused mainly on the summary of the analysis, which assessed the potential cost changes of the merging and optimisation of the courts, as well as the immediate financial risks of the changes. According to the final report, the proposed changes will entail additional financial costs for the court system.[22]

In June, the University of Tartu completed an analysis of the constitutionality of the amendments planned in the legislative intent.[23] According to the analysis, the legislative intent’s proposal to merge courts of the same type is constitutional, provided that access to administration of justice is guaranteed to everyone without unreasonable effort and that mechanisms for the allocation of cases within the courts guarantee the independence of the judge in the administration of justice. On the other hand, the inclusion of judges appointed for a fixed term (alternate judges) was not considered constitutional, since according to subsection 147 (1) of the Constitution all judges who adjudicate on behalf of the state are appointed for life.

The Supreme Court also commissioned two management analyses for the legislative intent.[24]

At the September meeting of the CAC, the representative of the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs announced that, based on the feedback, the preparation of the draft would not include the following issues proposed in the legislative intent: the transfer of cases to another court without changing the jurisdiction; the creation of a system of alternate judges; the removal of a judge from office on grounds of health or unsuitability; the payment of extra remuneration to a judge for working with a heavier caseload; and the issue of a judge not agreeing to being transferred to another department. These changes were not included in the draft amendment to the court organisation, which was ready by 7 November 2025, and moving forward, the following amendments were planned:

• merging courts of the same type – instead of the existing eight courts of first and second instance, three judicial institutions would remain;
• the establishment of the presidium in the courts of first and second instance (the presidium is, according to the draft, the governing body of the court, consisting of the chair of the court, plus, in the district court, the heads of departments and two members elected by the court en banc, in the administrative court, the deputy chair and a member elected by the court en banc, and, in the circuit court, the chairs of the chambers);
• transfer of court administrative tasks and reorganisation of the budget system;
• the creation of a court administration service to bring together the existing court administration functions and central court support services under a single institution;
• the creation of a system of feedback to judges, whereby judges at higher levels would give feedback to judges in lower courts;
• simplifying the application for a judge to work part-time and increasing the maximum age limit for a judge to serve;
• clarification of the restrictions on a judge’s professional duties and conditions for working outside the judicial office, so that, in addition to teaching and research, the judge may also engage in business and law-making activities, provided that this does not impair the performance of their professional duties;
• extending the validity period of disciplinary sanctions for judges from one to three years;
• amending the regulation on the security clearance of judicial candidates so that the security clearance takes place after the Supreme Court en banc has decided to submit the candidate to the President of the Republic for appointment;
• limiting the use of lay judges so that they participate in general criminal proceedings only if the accused requests it.[25]

When discussing the proposed amendments at the December meeting, it was noted that many of the issues are a matter of conviction rather than a fact-based dispute. Based on the view of the majority of the Supreme Court[26] that since the Constitution speaks of courts in plural, there must be at least two courts of the same type, the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs proposed that the four district courts be merged into two: Tartu-Viru and Harju-Pärnu district courts. The number of administrative and circuit courts was proposed to remain the same. The members of the CAC did not support the merger of the district courts as proposed. Several members of the CAC pointed out that at present, the filling of judge positions would help to alleviate the workload of judges and the lengthening of procedural deadlines.

The main criticism of the creation of the presidium, as proposed in the draft, was that it would include too large a proportion of members who would be elected or appointed by the chairs of courts themselves. To address this, it was proposed that the presidium should comprise the chair of the court, the elected members of the Council of the Courts and the elected members of the court en banc. There was a lack of consensus among the members of the CAC on both the membership of the presidium and the need for its creation.

After one more round of approval, on 16 February 2026, the Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs submitted the draft amendment to the court organisation[27] to the Government of the Republic.

Court budget

Under the cutback task imposed on the court system, the budget of the courts of first and second instance will have to be cut by around 2 million euros in 2025, 3.7 million euros in 2026 and 4.4 million euros in 2027. As 93% of the budget of first and second instance courts is spent on staff and property, the scope for budget cuts is limited. In order to cover the budget cuts in 2025, the CAC gave its consent to the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs to close the Põlva house of the Võru courthouse of the Tartu District Court and merge two Pärnu courthouses of the Pärnu District Court.[28] In the courts, operating costs were reduced through the abandonment of the purchase of video and conference equipment for courtrooms, abandonment of reimbursement of health and sports expenses and a reduction in training courses. In addition, the number of officials was reduced.

In order to meet the 2026 cutback target, it was proposed to close the Pärnu District Court’s Rapla courthouse and the Viru District Court’s Jõhvi courthouse; closing the latter would also mean closing the Tartu Administrative Court’s Jõhvi courthouse. However, the CAC did not have to take such a decision, as at its meeting on 14 March 2025 it was revealed that the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs is in negotiations with the Ministry of Finance on whether the savings on the salaries of the vacant judge positions could be included in the cutback target for the courts. An analysis of whether the courthouses could be preserved if they were in significantly smaller spaces and under more favourable conditions was also planned.

In May, the CAC decided to send an appeal[29] to the Government of the Republic and the Finance Committee of the Riigikogu, expressing concerns about the proper functioning of the administration of justice in the light of the looming budget cuts. The courts will have to cut their budgets by 1.69 million euros in 2026 compared to the 2025 budget and by 0.71 million euros in 2027 compared to 2026 budget. According to the CAC, a budget reduction of this magnitude will lead to a reduction in the number of law clerks, which will inevitably lead to longer proceedings. This, however, undermines everyone’s right to effective judicial protection and negatively affects Estonia’s economic environment and competitiveness.[30] The CAC made the following summary proposals to the Government of the Republic, including the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs:

1. postpone the budget cuts so that before they are made, the legislative changes that reduce the workload of the courts and make court procedures more efficient enter into force and the necessary digital solutions are implemented;
2. speed up the procedure for draft laws amending procedural codes aimed at reducing the workload of courts;
3. create a new court information system to enable data-based proceedings, develop artificial intelligence solutions to support record-keeping, update the information system for expedited payment orders and equip courtrooms with modern presentation technology.[31]

The Minister for Justice and Digital Affairs stated at a meeting in September that the cutback task of courts has not changed. Part of the 2026 cut is covered by the closure of the Pärnu District Court’s Rüütli Street building and the reduction of courtroom space in Jõhvi, Viljandi and Haapsalu. Court directors also considered the idea of facing 2026 with a negative budget. It was revealed at the session that the Government of the Republic has included the sale of the courthouse at Pärnu Road 7 in Tallinn under revenue in the preparation of the state budget for the next four years. As the state is planning to create an IT house that the Centre of Registers and Information Systems on Lubja Street in Tallinn will also be moving into, the vacant premises will be offered to the Tallinn Administrative Court and the Tallinn Circuit Court. The members of the CAC stressed that the approval of the CAC is required for deciding the locations of courts and courthouses. It was also pointed out that no analysis had been done of the economic feasibility of moving courts or the security risks of having half of Estonia’s judiciary in one building.

In December, the CAC approved the principles for the 2026 budget for the courts, which amounts to 61.6 million euros. Although the CAC was assured that no cuts in staff and economic expenditure were needed at this stage, it was not clear whether the Ministry of Finance would support the proposed changes to the budgeting methodology in relation to property budgeting. A representative of the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs stated that there are no plans to announce hiring rounds for vacant judge positions. Finally, it was formulated that “the CAC does not consider it right to move the courts out of the courthouse at Pärnu Road 7 in Tallinn, as the justification for the relinquishment of the building does not outweigh the historical-cultural argument. It is a unique building in Estonia, built at the end of the 19th century as a courthouse, and has been used consistently for the administration of justice since then.”[32]

Approvals in personnel matters and changes to workload methodology

In 2025, there were a number of changes regarding chairs of courts. At its meeting on 14 March, the CAC gave its approval to the Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs to appoint Liina Naaber-Kivisoo as chair of the Harju District Court, taking office on 17 April 2025. The CAC also supported the candidature of Priit Kama at its 17 April meeting and of Ene Andresen at its 12 December meeting as chairs of the court. Priit Kama heads the Viru District Court from 17 April 2025, Ene Andresen heads the Tartu Administrative Court from 1 January 2026.

In March, the CAC supported the amendment of the decree of the Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs regulating the number of judges[33] to temporarily appoint an additional judge to the Tartu Circuit Court. Under the changes, there will be 17 judges in the circuit court until the end of 2030.

The CAC gave its consent to increasing the maximum service age limit of the Tartu District Court judge Ülle Raag by one year. Subsections 99¹(2) and (3) of the Courts Act provides for exceptions to increasing the maximum service age limit for judges. According to these provisions, the Supreme Court en banc may, with the consent of the CAC and the judge, and on the proposal of the chair of the court, in exceptional cases, increase the maximum service age limit of a judge by up to two years if there is compelling public interest in the proper functioning of the administration of justice. Judge Ülle Raag’s term of office was already extended by one year in 2024, based on the need to disperse the change of judges and the resulting additional workload in court.[34] The proposal to increase the maximum service age limit in 2025 focused on the judge’s important contribution to the adjudication of insolvency and restructuring cases, and on the fact that her knowledge and experience contribute to the proper adjudication of these cases.[35]

As a separate issue, the measurement of the working time of judges and law clerks was on the agenda of the CAC in order to update the workload methodology. Measurement of proceedings started on 2 June 2025 in the PlanPro environment and is carried out in all types of proceedings. In December, the six-month measurement period was found to be insufficient to draw conclusions, given that the summer holiday period fell within the measurement period. Therefore, the CAC supported the idea of the workload methodology group to extend the measurement of proceedings in all types and all categories until 31 December 2026. The measurement period may be terminated earlier, as proposed by the working group, if the results are sufficient to amend the methodology and draw adequate conclusions.[36]

____________________________

[1] In 2024, regular sessions were held on 14 March, 30 May, 19 September and 12 December, with an extraordinary session on 17 April.
[2] Also in 2009, a draft Courts Act was prepared, which provided for the separation of the court administration from the executive branch. This draft was not adopted and was dropped from the proceedings in 2011 when the mandate of the Riigikogu expired. For more information, see H. Loot, M. Laaring. 15 years later: a new attempt to change the court administration. – Yearbook of Estonian Courts 2023 –  https://aastaraamat.riigikohus.ee/15-aastat-hiljem-uus-katse-muuta-kohtuhaldust/ (23.02.2026).
[3] Intent to develop a draft Act amending the Courts Act (model of court administration), 5 February 2024. – https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main/mount/docList/b896254f-41da-42e6-990a-b1ca77a9577f#BVifA7ac (14.02.2026).
[4] Act on Amendments to the Courts Act and Related Amendments to Other Acts (model of court administration), 22 July 2024 – https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main/mount/docList/ef505412-9612-4bd0-b430-df13ccd74a5c (14.02.2026)
[5] Minutes of the 130th session of the CAC, 19-20 September 2024, p. 22 – https://www.kohus.ee/sites/default/files/dokumendid/130.%20protokoll%2019.-20.09.24.pdf (14.02.2026).
[6] Ibid, p. 37.
[7] Ibid, p. 50.
[8] Minutes of the 131st meeting of the CAC, 6 December 2024, p. 25-30. – https://www.kohus.ee/sites/default/files/dokumendid/131.%20protokoll%2006.12.24.pdf (14.02.2026).
[9] Act on Amendments to the Courts Act and Related Amendments to Other Acts (model of court administration), 20 December 2024 – https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main/mount/docList/558e865f-e4b2-40fa-a9da-e59e83c04533 (14.02.2026).
[10] Minutes of the 132nd meeting of the CAC, 14 March 2025, p. 24-28 – https://www.kohus.ee/sites/default/files/dokumendid/132.%20protokoll%2014.03.2025.pdf (14.02.2026).
[11] Act on Amendments to the Courts Act and Related Amendments to Other Acts (improving the efficiency of the administration of courts) 632 SE. – https://www.riigikogu.ee/tegevus/eelnoud/eelnou/2df3cfc4-3ccc-4bc6-8886-d98cd5be4970/kohtute-seaduse-muutmise-ja-sellega-seonduvalt-teiste-seaduste-muutmise-seadus-kohtute-haldamise-tohustamine/ (14.02.2026).
[12] Explanatory memorandum to the draft Act on Amendments to the Courts Act and Related Amendments to Other Acts (model of court administration), p. 48.
[13] Minutes of the 134th session of the CAC, 30 May 2025, p. 16-24. – https://www.kohus.ee/sites/default/files/dokumendid/134.%20istungi%20protokoll%2030.05.2025.pdf (14.02.2026). [14] Act on amendments to the Courts Act and Code of Criminal Procedure (amendments to court organisation), 7 November 2025 – https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main/mount/docList/bf568a73-f4bb-474e-b46a-df26802ffb00 (14.02.2026).
[15] Summary of the draft amendment to the Courts Act. Working document of the CAC, submitted to the session of 6 December 2025.
[16] Minutes of the 136th meeting of the CAC, 12 December 2026, p. 16 – https://www.kohus.ee/sites/default/files/dokumendid/136_0.pdf (16.03.2026).
[17] Act on Amendments to the Courts Act and Related Amendments to Other Acts (amendments to the court organisation), 15 January 2026 – https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main/mount/docList/3bb876e8-8a3d-49d9-bd1c-9e5fa1589245 (14.02.2026).
[18] Harmonisation of the workload of judges, alternate judges, social guarantees for judges and other proposals to optimise the work of the courts. Draft legislative intent. Working document of the CAC, submitted on 28 February 2025.
[19] Minutes of the 132nd meeting of the CAC, 14 March 2025, p. 29-37 – https://www.kohus.ee/sites/default/files/dokumendid/132.%20protokoll%2014.03.2025.pdf (14.02.2026).
[20] Harmonisation of the workload of judges, appointment of alternate judges, payment of additional remuneration to judges and other proposals to make the work of the courts more efficient. Legislative intent. – https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main#B8mcroK0 (14.02.2026).
[21] Financial analysis of structural changes in the courts. Final Report, 30 May 2025 – https://www.justdigi.ee/sites/default/files/documents/2025-06/PwCA_Kohtus%C3%BCsteemi%20struktuurimuudatuse%20finantsanal%C3%BC%C3%BCs_l%C3%B5pparuanne.pdf (14.02.2026).
[22] Ibid, p. 20.
[23] Analysis of the constitutionality of the legislative intent “Harmonisation of the workload of judges, appointment of alternate judges, payment of additional remuneration to judges and other proposals to make the work of the courts more efficient”. Prepared by the working group of the School of Law, University of Tartu, 2025 – https://www.justdigi.ee/sites/default/files/documents/2025-07/VTK_po%CC%83hiseaduspa%CC%88rasuse_analu%CC%88u%CC%88s_lo%CC%83plik.pdf (14.02.2026).
[24] See K. Jaakson, V. Valkiainen. Considerations in designing the structure of professional organisations. University of Tartu, 2025. – https://www.riigikohus.ee/sites/default/files/3.%20V%C3%A4lisveebi%20sisu%20materjalid/Kohtureform/Kaalutlused%20professionaalsete%20organisatsioonide%20struktuuri%20kujundamisel_T%C3%9C.pdf (14.02.2026); K. Taro, T. Randma-Liiv, K. Sarapuu. Merging of the judicial institutions and reorganisation of their management. Tallinn University of Technology, 2025. – https://www.riigikohus.ee/sites/default/files/3.%20V%C3%A4lisveebi%20sisu%20materjalid/Kohtureform/Kohtuasutuste%20%C3%BChendamine%20ja%20juhtimise%20%C3%BCmberkorraldamine_TT%C3%9C.pdf (14.02.2025).
[25] Act on amendments to the Courts Act and Code of Criminal Procedure (amendments to court organisation), p. 1-2 –  https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main/mount/docList/bf568a73-f4bb-474e-b46a-df26802ffb00 (14.02.2026).
[26] Opinion of the Supreme Court en banc on the draft of Act on amendments to the Courts Act and Code of Criminal Procedure, 3 December 2025 – https://adr.rik.ee/riigikohus/dokument/18194386 (14.02.2026).
[27] Act on Amendments to the Courts Act and Related Amendments to Other Acts (amendments to the court organisation), 16 February 2026 – https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main/mount/docList/90fea85d-e936-45f8-a43b-dd7bf5c21e54 (20.02.2026).
[28] Minutes of the 131st meeting of the CAC, 6 December 2024, p. 21 – https://www.kohus.ee/sites/default/files/dokumendid/131.%20protokoll%2006.12.24.pdf (14.02.2026).
[29] Appeal of the CAC on the budget of the courts of first and second instance, 2 June 2025 – https://adr.rik.ee/riigikohus/dokument/17067757 (14.02.2026).
[30] Ibid, p. 1.
[31] Ibid, p. 1-2.
[32] Minutes of the 136th meeting of the CAC, 12 December 2026, p. 30 – https://www.kohus.ee/sites/default/files/dokumendid/136_0.pdf (16.03.2026).
[33] Decree of the Minister of Justice of 27 October 2005 No 47 “Number of Judges of the District, Administrative and Circuit Courts and their Distribution between Courthouses” – RT I, 12.04.2025, 52.
[34] Judge Ü. Raag’s maximum service age limit was also increased in 2024. See also https://aastaraamat.riigikohus.ee/kohtute-haldamise-noukoja-tegevus-2024-aastal/ (23.02.2026).
[35] Minutes of the 133rd meeting of the CAC, 17 April 2025, p. 3 – https://www.kohus.ee/sites/default/files/dokumendid/133.%20protokoll_17.04.2025.pdf (14.02.2026).
[36] Minutes of the 136th meeting of the CAC, 12 December 2026, p. 26-29 – https://www.kohus.ee/sites/default/files/dokumendid/136_0.pdf (16.03.2026).