The main justification for the existence of the SimpliVi project is the main Deliverable "SimpliVi Recommendations & Best Practises" (official title: "D2.1 – Recommendations for simplifying cross-border judicial videoconferencing"). The ambition was to create hands-on recommendations, to draft them in a way that the target groups were able to actually transform them to a tangible practical application. The definition of SimpliVi's target groups is understood broadly and contains practitioners, policy makers and the administration responsible for videoconferencing support of judicial authorities. The recommendations themselves are also understood broadly and cover topics from a legal, organisational and technical aspect.

As it turned out during the project lifetime, the main challenge was to extract from the vast amount of input the most essential information, which could serve as comprehensive and practical recommendations and best practises. In Story #10: Putting the Pieces Together we have already described the first part of the journey from study visits, interviews, questionnaires and desk research to the SimpliVi Consolidation Document.

The extraction of recommendation was again a challenge. We have heard many different impediments and many different approaches to overcome them. But are these approaches fit for an official recommendation to other authorities and Member States?

Fortunately, most of them are or at least provide an approach to an official recommendation. Additionally, there were practises, which did not suit as a general recommendation. Such practises were in place either due to a specific situation within a single country or the practise would not be possible or at least controversial from a legal point of view in other countries. Nevertheless they could provide for food for thought for countries to rethink their national judicial practises. Such practises are therefore added to the document, but instead of recommendations they are included as best practises. 

In the end, the total number of recommendations and best practises is higher than initially expected. The SimpliVi project has therefore made a selection of the most relevant recommendations and best practises. Only this selection is included in the official document. The shortened list allows for easier reading and focussing on the most relevant recommendations and best practises. Still, the interested reader will find the complete list of recommendations and best practises as an annex included in the same document.

The final result is now available below. The SimpliVi project encourages all readers to pass the document on to colleagues, especially those competent for cross-border judicial videoconferences, no matter if the are judicial practitioners, policy makers or videoconferencing administrators. As a project we can provide only recommendations. However, the recommendations will only be of added value if they are applied by as many people and countries as possible.

by Mathias Maurer