Citizen Survey	(CSD Q601)
	If you something bad happened to you, do you think you would get justice?	Women		Men
	Yes	80.5%	N=609	63.1%	N=591
	Citizen Survey	(CSD Q602)
	Where would you go to get justice if something bad happened to you? (3 most common responses)	Traditional Local arbiters	State Distict	Traditional Local arbiters	Traditional Local arbiters	None	State Upazilla	Traditional Local arbiters	Sponsored Local arbiters
		UP Chair	Courts	respected member of the community	elected representative (not including UP Chair)	Nowhere	Police	Shalish	Village court, NGO, Other	N
	Women	28.9%	27.1%	15.9%	8.2%	5.6%	5.7%	0.7%	0.5%	609
	Men	24.0%	20.5%	29.4%	9.2%	8.5%	3.9%	1.0%	0.2%	591
	Citizen Survey	CSD Q501	SCD Q301	CSD Q201
	Have never used	Formal court	Village court	Shalish
	Women	96.9%	99.8%	92%		n = 609
	Men	70.2%	98.6%	67.5%		n = 591
	Practitioner Survey, Public outside Court (N:10)
	From 10 people attending court:	between 4 and 6 prior court attendances	costs to attend between 200 -300 BDT	they had travelled distances of between 10 - 28 miles each time
	Practitioner Survey, Holding Cells (N:32)
	Experiences of detainees awaiting Court appearance in Court holding cells:	Were represented by a lawyer	Agreed that lawyers did not attend all scheduled appearances		Understood what was happening with their cases
	Women	100.0%	0.0%		a little	N=1
	Men	most	0.0%		few	N=31
	Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court (CJM) Case Processing (2012)
	Cases carried over from previous year	New cases	Total carried over and new cases	Convictions	Acquittals	Other	Guilty Pleas	Total cases disposed	Cases carried forward into next year	Pending caseload growth rate
	1087	1650	2737	69	568	579	208	1424	1313	20.8%
	Note About Data
	Criminal case processing data from the Supreme Court does not confirm overall numbers of cases facing the court and unresolved cases carried forward. Cases carried forward: 3,840; New cases (Cases Filed): 7,517; Disposed: 6,490; Pending end year: 4,867.
	Age of (CJM) Pending Cases (2012)
	Year of case filing		1995	1996	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	% of cases pending more than 5 years
	Number of cases		0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	75	80	232	652	678	0.0%
	Age of (DSC) Pending Cases (2012)
	Year of case filing		1995	1996	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	% of cases pending more than 5 years
	Number of cases		0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	100	158	190	260	295	298	372	560	558	25.0%
	District Sessions Court (DSC) Case Processing (2012)
	Criminal Cases carried over from previous year	New Criminal cases	Total carried over and new cases	Convictions	Acquittals	Other	Guilty pleas	Total cases disposed	Cases carried forward into next year	Pending caseload growth rate
	2391	2263	4654	93	465	1282		1840	2814	17.7%
	Civil Cases carried over from previous year	New Civil cases	Total carried over and new cases	Convictions	Acquittals	Other	Guilty pleas	Total cases disposed	Cases carried forward into next year	Pending caseload growth rate
	3709	1462	5171					1190	3981	7.3%
	Total DSC cases carried over from previous year	Total DSC New cases	Total Criminal and Civil carried over and new cases
	6100	3725	9825
	Data note
	Criminal case processing data from the Supreme Court does not confirm overall numbers of cases facing the court and unresolved cases carried forward. Cases carried forward: 2,339; New cases (Cases Filed): 2,315; Disposed: 1,397; Carried forward: 3,257.
	Nari-o-Shishu Court Case Processing (2012)
	Cases carried over from previous year	New cases	Total carried over and new cases	Convictions	Acquittals	Other	Guilty pleas	Total cases disposed	Cases carried forward into next year	Pending caseload growth rate
	1126		1126			228		228	898	-20.2%
	Note About Data	(DMI)
	Supreme Court data does not confirm case figures above. Cases carried forward: 1178; New Cases (Cases Filed): 1,015; Disposed: 527; Carried forward: 1,666.
	Practitioner Survey, Magistrate Court and Court Clerks (N:5)
	Most common characterization of formal justice processes from practitioners at CJM courts	Av no. adjournments per case	Main reason for adjournments	Av time to complete trial	Proportion of trials ending in a guilty plea	Proportion of offences compounded	proportion accused rep by lawyer	any pre-trial review to expedite case disposal	local co-ordination mechanism for justice actors to meet regularly to discuss local justice situation	proportion of accused who are women	most common crimes of which women accused
		10 to 25	non attendance of lawyers & witnesses	6 - 24 m	very few	less than 50%	all	frequently	some practitioners indicated that there is such a mechanism	between 5% and 10%	narcotics
	Practitioner Survey, DS Court and Court Clerks (N:6)
	Most common characterization of formal justice processes from practitioners at DS courts	Av no. adjournments per case	Main reason for adjournments	Av time to complete trial	Proportion of trials ending in a guilty plea	Proportion of offences compounded	proportion accused rep by lawyer	any pre-trial review to expdite case disposal	local co-ordination mechanism for justice actors to meet regularly to discuss local justice situation	proportion of accused who are women	most common crimes of which women accused
		10 to 25	witness not present	more than 2 years	none	very few	all	never	some practitioners indicated that there is such a mechanism	between 5% and 10%	narcotics
	Citizen Survey	(CSD Q507)
	Single most important reason for having the crime against you dealt with through the formal court (top 4 responses):	Will get justice	Told it is the right place to go	Quickest process	Neutral
	Women	50.0%	12.5%	12.5%	12.5%	N=8
	Men	55.6%	11.1%	27.8%	0.0%	N=18
	Citizen Survey	(CSD Q204)	1
	Single most important reason for having the crime against you dealt with by Shalish (top 4 responses):	Will get justice	Told it is the right place to go	Quickest process	Easy to get to
	Women	35.3%	14.7%	11.8%	26.5%	N=34
	Men	37.8%	1.3%	36.5%	7.1%	N=156
	Village Court (VC) Case Processing (2012)
		New cases			Cases appealed	Cases implemented
		Women	Men	Total
	See list of individual Village Courts in Infrastructure tab	No data	No data	No data	No data	No data
	Practitioner Survey, UP members and administration (N: 7)
	Most common characterization of cases and processes	20 - 50% applicants are women	Main complaints are assault, and property  disputes	Case disposed of in 1-2 hrs	No cases appealed to the CJM	Average monthly caseload 5 - 10	Court proceedings are held twice a week
	Interview Responses (No Number recorded)
	Most common attitudes of Village Court users	cost of proceedings is reasonable	justice is achieved swiftly	there is legal assistance at every level	less crime
	Shalish Case Processing
	Practitioner Survey	(PSR)
	Most common characterization of cases and processes from 2 Shalishkar practitioners:	30 - 90%  applicants are women	Top 3 main complaints are family, land, property  disputes	Average monthly caseload is between5 and 50	Resolve 75 - 80% cases	Refer 0 cases to police	90% cases maintain the settlement agreed to in Shalish	Main challenge faced with police - bribery	restitution n is the most common resolution
	Citizen Survey	(CSD Q208a, 207, 208d)					Data note
		Case resolution was reached	Case was resolved in under one month	Issue had a fair hearing			Data suggests negative framing of question caused confusion (in translation). High rates of compliance appear to be recorded.
	Women	72.3%	87.2%	78.7%	N=47
	Men	88.8%	90.9%	94.1%	N=187