For some time, the European Union has been indicating to its Member States that access to justice is a fundamental right and a condition for the efficacy of legal systems, reminding them that the recognition of a right is of no avail in the absence of the appropriate instruments to enforce it. Therefore, in its Directives, Decisions and Recommendations it calls on, encourages and, in the end, orders Member States to facilitate access to justice and, therefore, to promote alternative methods of conflict resolution and create services to put these into practice, given that, along with jurisdiction, they represent a form of justice.

The Council is the Governing Body of Judges, who are constitutionally charged with the task of judging and enforcing judgments. We therefore form a part of the public service referred to as the judicial administration. In view of this context of public service, we cannot remain passive in the face of citizens' demands: the resolution of their problems, above and beyond the limited response of the laws, which they often fail to understand, and which often provides no consolation and proves incapable of alleviating their pain or concerns.

Mediation is, undoubtedly, the best known alternative system for the resolution of conflicts.  Mediation can be defined as a model for conflict resolution that, via the intervention of a neutral and impartial “third party”, helps two or more individuals to understand the origin of their differences and become acquainted with the causes and consequences of events, to question their stances and to find solutions to disputes. In view of this reflection, the General Council of the Judiciary felt implicated and, since 2005, has been committed to supporting and promoting several lines of work entailing active support for mediation in a range of areas. Work has been consolidated in the family and criminal spheres. Moreover, mediation has been extended to take in civil, labour and administrative matters.

The previous Council made judicial mediation one of the cornerstones of its Plan for Modernising Justice.  This Council constantly reaffirms its commitment to quality and the modernising of justice and therefore its decisive support for mediation.  Moreover, whilst our work is primarily concerned with judicial mediation (the context in which we act), we are cognisant of the fact that in all neighbouring countries, judicial mediation has always drawn this other form of justice in its wake, that is, both judicial and extrajudicial mediation. Therefore, as we support and promote judicial mediation, we are contributing to the increased awareness, introduction and development of mediation on a general level.

Analysing the state of affairs when its term commenced, the General Council of the Judiciary deemed that three main lines of action were to be taken:

1. The consolidation of judicial mediation as a system for the resolution of conflicts that would complement jurisdiction.
2. The dissemination of the efforts made by the Council in relation to mediation, both amongst members of the judiciary and other professionals linked to mediation and citizen affairs in general.
3. The safeguarding of judicial mediation carried out in jurisdictional bodies.

To this end, a road map has been drawn up, primarily with a view to the homogenisation of mediation at national level and ensuring the quality of services.

The General Council of the Judiciary will promote the introduction of high-quality mediation services in all judicial bodies at national level, with particular focus on those bodies where mediation appears less developed. The first step to achieve this end is the indispensable institutional coordination. Therefore, this Council proposes the creation of a framework for collaboration with those bodies assigned competencies within this alternative form of justice. To this end, on 27 April 13 framework agreements for collaboration were signed by the Ministry of Justice and the 12 Autonomous Regions, with transfer of competencies in this area of justice. On 3 December, the constituent meeting of the monitoring committees for these agreements took place. During the course of the meeting a series of compromises in terms of actions were reached by all members, which might be summarised as a global commitment to collaboration and joint efforts to promote mediation. We continue to work to complete this institutional framework, secure in the knowledge that the public authorities, institutions and citizens are capable of resolving their conflicts independently and pacifically where they are afforded space and sufficient resources, as this is, ultimately, an essential exercise of democratic freedom and responsibility.

As the governing body of judges, the training of members of the judiciary remains one of our essential duties. For many years, courses have been offered in all jurisdictional areas and in all territories, in both initial (Judicial School) and ongoing training programmes.

In the Mediation section of the website, comprehensive information on these lines of work is provided: a list of bodies involved in the project, mediation services, data organised by autonomous region and area of law, periodical management reports, protocols for referral to mediation, agreements signed with Administrations and Institutions for the implementation of projects, legislation, jurisprudence, doctrinal studies, bibliography, news and information relating to mediation.

In the restricted-access area, members of the judiciary are provided with a forum for reflection and consultation to exchange information on problems, technical, substantive or procedural difficulties and to obtain and provide suggestions that may serve as solutions.