thus be set up with a narrow mandate, with clearly defined admissible complaints, and would have an “advisory, educational and standard-setting role”,13 in addition to dispute resolution. Importantly, final remedies should be legally enforceable, go beyond financial compensation to include public apologies and bind commitments to change current practices. In line with an overall recent effort by the international community to improve and expedite access to justice, 14 the European Union and the Council of Europe have increasingly been working on the enhancement of already existing justice systems. With this in mind, since 2005 an annual competition, the Crystal Scale of Justice, has also been organised to bring to the fore positive and innovative examples of practice in European Courts. Among these cases is the successful example of the creation of Accelerated Family Proceedings in Berlin and in other parts of Germany, a new procedural approach created to address lengthy processes and to expedite judicial proceedings regarding family cases. Among others, the approach relies on interdisciplinary working teams, who are assigned to specific geographical areas, as well as on an effective collaboration among all parties involved (including judges, lawyers, social workers).15 According to the 2016 Fundamental Rights Agency’s Handbook on European law relating to access to justice, in the municipality of Espoo (Finland) judicial courts have instead established the so called “Jouko-days”, days where priority is given to the processing of children’s cases to reduce proceedings’ times. Given the existence of a mechanism, quick access to justice, timely proceedings and swift decisions are, in fact, equally important. A new justice mechanism created to tackle countless migrant workers’ claims against wage theft should thus respond to these fundamental elements as well. Effective access to justice also includes the ability to receive adequate redress in case a wrongdoing is committed: “[a]ccess to justice refers to the process of hearing and deciding claims of […] rights violation, while substantive redress concerns the result of that process: the actual relief granted to the victim.” 16 One form through which this can be achieved is compensation, which means offsetting the damage suffered as a result of a breach of one’s rights. Recognising the existence of multiple barriers to effective compensation, the European Commission (EC) has recently looked at solutions for the creation of more effective justice mechanisms that ensure a greater protection of people’s rights against violations and abuses from this perspective as well. In 2019, a new report17 drafted by a Special Adviser was, in fact, delivered to the former EC President Jean-Claude Junker, specifically aimed at informing a new EU strategy on how to improve access to compensation for victims of crime, particularly in cross-border situations. Even though not specifically aimed at tackling wage theft or, in broader terms, not tailored to the injustices experienced by migrant workers in the Asian region, this report represents a useful resource to further expand one’s understanding of key components for the creation of functioning justice mechanisms that serve their purpose effectively. The report calls upon structural shifts that, in the first place, require states’ determination in upholding human rights and taking responsibility for their violations, for example by compensating victims upfront and only subsequently reclaiming the amount from the offender. Importantly, the report suggests that inability to access adequate compensation may result in secondary victimisation. On the contrary, just redress contributes to formal recognition of the violation and, in turn, reinforces the recognition of the individual as right bearer, with actual access to their rights. It also works as a potential deterrent from future abuses of the same kind. 13 As above. As above; and see for example, OECD and World Justice Project, Building a Business Case for Access to Justice <https://www.oecd.org/gov/building-a-business-case-for-access-to-justice.pdf> 15 European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights et al., Handbook on European law relating to access to justice FRA handbook access to justice (2016) < https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2016/handbook-european-law-relating-access-justice>; The Accelerated Family Proceeding (2014) <https://rm.coe.int/the-accelerated-family-proceeding-aveiro-october-16th-sixteenth2014/168078af77>; Council of Europe, “The Crystal Scales of Justice” Prize, The European prize for innovative practice contributing to the efficiency and quality of civil justice (2014) <https://rm.coe.int/-the-crystal-scales-of-justice-prize-the-european-prize-forinnovative/168078d0c4> 16 As quoted in Wewerinke-Singh M., Remedies for Human Rights Violations Caused by Climate Change (2019) Climate Law 9, Brill Nijhoff, doi: 10.1163/18786561-00903005 17 Milquet J., Strengthening Victims’ Rights: From Compensation To Reparation, (2019) European Commission 14 4

Select target paragraph3