1The reporting member shall, within one month from the receipt of the evaluation acts from the chairperson, draft an evaluation report.

2All statistical data shall be analysed in the context; in order to avoid conclusions for issues which are not attributable to the magistrate. The analysis of the statistical data on the clearance rate, duration of proceedings and average time to substantiate the judgment or to finalizing a case shall be based on the complexity of cases, volume of cases and abrupt rise in the case numbers and other issues related to the work conditions.

3The self-evaluation of the magistrate and the chairperson’s opinion shall be verified against the other information gathered from other sources of evaluation.

4In any case and in particular with regard the assessment of judicial or prosecutorial capacities set out in Articles 72 and 73 of this Law, the interference with the independence of the magistrate shall always be avoided.

5The draft evaluation report contains:

aPersonal data of the magistrate, education, seniority, previous evaluation grades and general information related to the evaluation period, like, chamber or section where the magistrate has carried out the activity and disciplinary measures taken against the magistrate in the evaluation period;

bData resulting from the evaluation sources and their analyses for the evaluation of the activity of the magistrate under the evaluation criteria;

cProposal of the evaluation grades in regard to each evaluation criterion and of the overall evaluation grade;

çProposals for training or recommendations for steps to be taken in order to improve the performance of the magistrate.

6The draft evaluation report is accompanied by the report describing and analysing in detail the data collected.

7The draft evaluation report will be integral part of the evaluation file.