How to choose Supreme Court judges – the experience of Ukraine and peace of
the judicial Reform is one of the most ambitious, taking place in Ukraine. Running a full reset of the judiciary and eliminated the political influence on personnel processes. The Verkhovna Rada is excluded from the procedures for the appointment, transfer and release of vessels. Now it is an independent body, the High Council of justice. The President has a ceremonial role, signing decrees. This is provided by amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine, laws "On judicial system and status of judges" and "On the High Council of justice". The country's first contest in the Supreme Court is under the microscope of the public. This openness sometimes surprising the international community. In the issue of transparency in the selection of judges of Ukraine made a huge not even a step, and jump, sometimes ahead of the neighbouring democratic countries. We've seen recently, the Polish Senate after the lower house of Parliament, voted for initiated by the ruling party "Law and justice" amendments to the law on the structure of the courts, which include, in particular, the provision to Parliament and the Minister of justice the right to appoint judges independently, without consulting with representatives of bodies of justice. During the voting, which took place almost in Ukrainian, on the night of July 15, for the reform said the 57 senators vs was 29. Now the law must be signed by the President of Poland Andrzej Duda. The Commission plans to consider the Polish judicial reform, and, as stated by the representative of the European Commission, in Brussels watching the situation in Poland, "with great concern". Critical changes in the justice system evaluates the Polish opposition, which, in their opinion, subjugate the country's Supreme court to the Ministry of justice and the opposition party "Civic platform" on July 16 held a protest outside the Polish Sejm against the controversial reform of the judicial system. Changes in the judiciary of Poland and criticizes the Minister of justice of Germany Heiko Maas. "Interference in the independence of justice is endangering the rule of law and separation of powers", - he declared in interview to newspaper publishing enterprises Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland (RND), published July 15. The unprecedented openness of the contest to the Supreme Court Supreme Court justices will be appointed to posts indefinitely (up to the age of 65). Given that most candidates in middle age, this part will last about 25 years. Future judges should solve a lot of problems that have accumulated in judicial practice, therefore, their professional and moral characteristics shall be the same as in zirconolite, or at least approximate them. Ukraine established a selection procedure that has no analogues in the world and is a kind of Ukrainian know-how. Higher qualification Commission of judges of Ukraine through a variety of methods evaluates candidates on the criteria of competence (professional, social, personal), professional ethics and integrity. The methodology of the competition is published on the CCG website. In addition, the society explained the essence of each step, each phase with the publication of results on the page in Facebook. Unprecedented is the publication of the dossiers of all candidates in the armed forces (not just CVS). That is, all who signed up for the contest. For interview candidates can be seen online on the CCG Youtube channel. And the most "interesting characters" you can watch the videos. Of them can even program to mount and call it "Obvious and incredible", or "Sadistic tales" or "Millionaire in the judicial robe". The public integrity Board, which consists of representatives of public associations may indicate a door any candidate. GRD is looking for information on a candidate, and its finding made public. But the final decision still remains with the CCG. On the other hand, such a legal know-how shocking European experts. No such examples in any country of Europe. After all, the publication of negative findings GRD can harm the person's reputation and the judiciary as a whole. Candada, at some point, flies out of competition with the "wolf ticket" in his pocket. By European standards, is the verdict of the incompetent and the way to the unemployment office. In European countries there is no such meticulously open procedure of selection of judges. For example, in Ireland, information regarding the stages of selection (lists, intermediate results, and the like) is closed. Aggregate data are only displayed in the annual report of the Advisory Council for appointment of judges. In Sweden, established the obligation of informing about job opportunities and basic facts concerning the selection procedure. The rest is confidential. In particular, the interviews and the meetings of the qualifying body. No online translation. Similar practice in Croatia, Hungary and Finland . Only published information about the main stages of the selection process. That is "light" information about the beginning of the contest and the final results. In Slovenia provides for the disclosure of information about all stages of selection. But decisions are made mostly behind closed doors. The exception is the decision of the National Assembly, which was adopted by the General rules of parliamentary procedure, which permits limited public participation. Certain requirements regarding the publication of data on stages of selection exist in Lithuania. However, since judges are appointed by the legislature – the Seimas, the nature of his powers is often cited as a symptom of "politicization of the appointment process of judges." In Bulgaria during the selection shall be made public the lists of candidates, which viably desire to go to the competition and those who are admitted to this competition. Also publish the content of the tests, examinations and the results of the competition. However, interviews with candidates and procedures for voting and adopting decisions by the Supreme judicial Council are confidential. That is, again, no "online movie". In the Czech Republic non-public nature, have not only decision-making procedure, but in common stages. Announcement of the selection procedure is not subject to disclosure. Public is only the appointment of judges. That is, the final. In Norway from open sources it is possible to learn the names of the candidates for the position of judge of the Supreme court; the list of candidates with marks obtained during the evaluation of the Board on the appointment of judges, but justify the conclusion about guidelines – no. In Germany all stages of selection of judges, the armed forces are held in confidence. The selection procedure takes place without public hearings and publication of the list of candidates. As you can see, in European countries there is no practice is not something that online broadcasts of interviews, but for the most part, full publication information on every stage of the competition and, moreover, each participant. Public participation in the selection of Supreme judges: the world and Ukraine Ukrainian know-how – is the inclusion of the Public Council of integrity in the decision-making process about the candidate according to sun criteria. Representatives of the GRD not only help the CCG to gather information. If the GRD considers that the candidate does not meet these criteria, the CCG raised the issue on the ballot and the candidate may, at best, quietly to retire from the contest, and at worst to fly with the scandal. For the European practice is a unique case, because the public is generally not involved in the personnel processes of the judicial system. On the contrary: it is or competence of the bodies, formed by judges or other branches of government. And if the public joins and then only with a consultative vote. And of the representatives of the "public" delegate the power structure. For example, in 2012 in Moldova and provided for the establishment of the Supreme Council of magistracy special select Committee (of the Board). Members of this Committee were 4 judges and 3 "civil society representatives with an excellent reputation", who is elected by the superior Council of magistracy. That is, this body is not independent. In Denmark, although the appointment procedure is closed at the moment (only publish advertisements about jobs and the decision on the appointment), but the composition of the Board on the appointment of judges there are two representatives of the public who may not belong to political parties or to be members of elected bodies at national or regional level. In Norway, members of the Council on the appointment of judges there are two members of the public, but they are appointed by the monarch. In the above-mentioned protest Poland the public is generally not involved in the selection procedure. Published only basic solutions. The composition of the National Council of justice (on the final nomination of candidates) dominate the judiciary. In Ireland the Board on the appointment of judges should be three persons appointed by the Minister of justice on the criterion of "informed consumers of judicial services." In addition, proof of the relevant qualifications and professional experience partly rests with the Union of advocates and the Law society of Ireland – but only in the case of considering the appointment in the armed forces bursters and solstorm (i.e., representatives of the legal profession). In Canada the selection procedure of judges, the armed forces and the list of candidates is a procedure non-public. With the aim of fulfilling the government's obligations to ensure transparency, the members of the standing Committee on justice and human rights of the house of Commons standing Committee on legal and constitutional Affairs of the Senate, as well as representatives from all parties in the house are given the opportunity to participate in a session of questions and answers concerning the final candidates. The session, which is moderated by a law Professor, provides an opportunity for parliamentarians and members of the public to see the future judge. But this knowledge has a decisive influence. In Ukraine, Public Council of integrity is formed by public organizations. Part GRD was included, even professional lawyers, who did not cease their activities. They appreciate not only my colleagues (as in the UK or Ireland), but also judges who have listened to, listen to, or can, in the future, to consider cases with their participation as representatives. It's called "conflict of interest" when candidates try to "please" the evaluators, which is contrary to European standards. In addition, the decision of the GRD not only affects the reputation of a candidate judge in the public eye, but his further participation in the competition. As to overcome the negative conclusion GRD Higher qualification Commission may, by a majority of votes during the plenary session. Not overcome – the candidate receives the same "wolf ticket". Therefore, it is hardly possible to speak about equivalent comparison procedures that exist in the world, with the Ukrainian innovation – the Public Council of integrity. However, with unprecedented powers in GRD is currently no methodology for determining the eligibility of the candidate to the standards of professional ethics and integrity. In the end, no responsibility is not provided. It in its opinion regarding the Regulations of the Public Council integrity drew the attention of the Council of Europe. In the end, this competition was a challenge not only for candidates but also for all participants in the process. Based on "Commander in chief" This was reported in the Ternopil regional state administration.Ïåðåâåäåíî ñåðâèñîì "ßíäåêñ.Ïåðåâîä÷èê": translate.yandex.ru.
Source: http://uzinform.com.ua/
