As every year, the functioning of the court system was a widely discussed topic in the legal community last year. The work of the courts, decisions made, procedural approaches, and practical difficulties were part of these discussions throughout the year.
Interestingly, how do lawyers evaluate the work of the courts in 2025? What are their opinions on the courts' performance and their expectations for 2026?
E-huquq.az learned their opinions on the matter.
Shulan Naghiyev stated that as a continuation of the reforms in the judicial-legal system in recent years, 2025 has been remembered as a period of institutional improvement and high digitalization: "In particular, the increased functionality of the 'Electronic Court' system, regular updates to unified court practice, and strict adherence to procedural deadlines have significantly eased the professional activities of lawyers. The application of a unified approach based on principles of equality in courts and objective examination of cases has further strengthened citizens' trust in the legal system. As a lawyer, I can say that this development both enhances the quality of fair justice and further strengthens the principle of the rule of law. My main expectation for 2026 is the broader and more practical application of court hearings via videoconference. Currently, the participation of lawyers practicing in the capital in courts located in remote regions causes significant time loss and additional financial expenses. Furthermore, frequent travel for lawyers residing in our regions to participate in hearings in other areas can negatively affect the efficiency of their work. This situation sometimes also limits citizens' options for choosing qualified lawyers. Improving and expanding the videoconference mechanism in terms of norms and technology will increase the efficiency of court reviews, allow lawyers to manage multiple processes simultaneously, and facilitate citizens' access to legal aid. At the same time, further expansion of unified court approaches and a reduction in cases rejected for formal reasons will further increase trust in the court system and accelerate the adaptation of the judicial system of the Republic of Azerbaijan to modern world standards."
According to Emin Kichikbayov, 2025 has been a year of development in terms of court operations: "The number of judges increased, and training was provided to judges and staff. This was carried out based on the instructions of Inam Karimov, Chairman of the Supreme Court and the Judicial-Legal Council. In this regard, on behalf of all lawyers, we express our gratitude to Mr. Inam for ensuring transparency and strengthening the judicial system. Furthermore, in 2025, more technological innovations were applied in the judicial system, electronic services expanded, and citizens' access to courts became more accessible compared to previous years. Document circulation accelerated in many processes, and the organization of court hearings became more systematic. At the same time, the fact that some judges are writing more reasoned decisions and paying more attention to legal arguments can be assessed positively. This indicates that the judicial system is gradually developing in a more transparent and professional direction. Expectations for 2026 are even more promising. Legal professionals and citizens now expect more stable, consistent, and high-quality performance from the courts. The main goal is for court decisions to be clear, understandable, and based on a unified approach. The completion of processes in shorter periods and the equal protection of parties' rights are of particular importance. Our expectation for 2026 is for court proceedings to be conducted more efficiently, decisions to be written in simple and reasoned language, judges' specialization to increase, more attention to be paid to the positions of lawyers and parties, and for trust in the courts to be further strengthened. 2025 was a year of a solid foundation. I hope that 2026 will build upon this foundation to form a stronger, fairer, and citizen-centered judicial system. We must work together as a nation to strengthen and develop the legal system."
Hikmat Amiraslanov, in response to our question, said: "After President Ilham Aliyev's Decree 'On Deepening Reforms in the Judicial-Legal System,' reforms in this area began. Although there have been certain changes in the work of the courts, the results of these reforms were somewhat delayed. One of the main reasons for this was the difficulty of the judge selection procedure and the heavy workload in the courts. As a result, courts sometimes did not start on time, judges faced too much work, which led to various problems. However, in later stages, the Judicial-Legal Council began to take steps to increase the number of judges. This increase had its effect. But even today, although the staff number for the court system's judge corps is 800, only 678 judges are actually active. This is still not enough. In my opinion, although the workload is high in district courts in the regions, the work there has been more efficient. For example, the Shirvan Court of Appeal operates more efficiently, and courts start on time, and decisions are made faster. This positively affects citizens' attitudes towards the courts. Experience is being formed, and cases are handled more quickly and professionally. As is known, at the end of last year, new judges were appointed to a number of courts by order of President Ilham Aliyev. This will lead to a slight reduction in the workload. New judges bring more modern approaches, which positively impacts efficiency. Although young judges may not have sufficient experience, they conduct more extensive research on cases. I evaluate the approach of young judges to their work positively. As lawyers, our expectation is for increased objectivity and transparency. I believe that development must continue. The new era demands technological development, and electronic systems have already been created. These systems allow for easier resolution of cases, and although some problems exist, they are being resolved."
Mirdamat Gadirli discussed the positive and negative aspects he observed last year: "For me, the work of the courts in 2025 was marked by the confirmation of conviction verdicts by most judges and the in-depth investigation of cases by some judges. The fact that some judges truly investigated cases in depth and provided correct legal assessments impressed me. However, a case that remains a black mark in court history for me in 2025 was the adoption of different decisions in two cases of the same nature by the cassation instance court. I made various appeals regarding this. I inquired about which panel made the correct decision and which made the incorrect one, but I received no response. This means that some judges still operate according to their own will, rather than based on unified court practice. Overall, I assess the work of the courts in 2025 as average, meaning neither fully satisfactory nor a complete failure."
Narmin Aliyeva also generally assessed the work of the courts in 2025 positively: "However, it is important to organize special training for some judges. Otherwise, these negative issues will only cast a shadow on the positive reforms being carried out. One of my expectations is the formation of a special control mechanism regarding case review periods. This is because cases, even for ordinary claims, are sometimes reviewed for months. The issue of deadlines is very important in administrative cases, and such delays are a factor that directly affects the quality of fair justice. One of the issues that concerns me is the heavy workload and the low number of judges at the Absheron District Court. I hope that fundamental reforms will be implemented here. Furthermore, I believe that generalized court practice sometimes 'robotizes' judges, who simplify their work by simply saying 'this is the position of the Supreme Court' without being interested in the individual circumstances of the case. Improving unified court practice is necessary. Fundamental reforms related to the 'Electronic Court' system would be more beneficial. It is necessary to expand the system's capabilities, as it is not possible to submit some evidence, and the system does not support this function."